Upload
others
View
5
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Franklin County, Illinois Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan A 2015 Update of the 2009 Countywide MHMP
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Franklin County, Illinois
Adoption Date: -- _______________________ --
Primary Point of Contact Ryan Buckingham
Director of Emergency Management Franklin County Emergency Management Agency
202 W. Main Street Benton, IL 62812
Phone: (618) 439-4362 Email: [email protected]
Secondary Point of Contact Gary A. Little
Deputy Director of Emergency Management Franklin County Emergency Management Agency
202 W. Main Street Benton, IL 62812
Phone: (618) 439-4362 Email: [email protected]
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
ii
Acknowledgements
The Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan would not have been possible without the incredible
feedback, input, and expertise provided by the County leadership, citizens, staff, federal and state
agencies, and volunteers. We would like to give special thank you to the citizens not mentioned below
who freely gave their time and input in hopes of building a stronger, more progressive County. Franklin
County gratefully acknowledges the following people for the time, energy and resources given to create
the Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan.
Franklin County Board
Randall Crocker, Chairman Ken Hungate, Vice-Chairman Neil Hargis Tom Vaughn Alan Price David Rea Stephen D. Leek Jack C. Warren Danny Melvin
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
iii
Table of Contents
Section 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1
Section 2. Planning Process ........................................................................................................................ 2
2.1 Timeline ......................................................................................................................................... 2
2.2 Jurisdiction Participation Information ........................................................................................... 2
2.3 Planning Team Information ........................................................................................................... 3
2.4 Public Involvement ........................................................................................................................ 4
2.5 Neighboring Community Involvement .......................................................................................... 5
2.6 Review of Technical Documents .................................................................................................... 5
2.7 Adoption by Local Government ..................................................................................................... 5
Section 3. County Profile ............................................................................................................................ 6
3.1 County Background ....................................................................................................................... 6
3.2 Demographics ............................................................................................................................... 7
3.3 Economy and Industry ................................................................................................................... 7
3.4 Land Use and Development Trends............................................................................................... 8
3.5 Climate .......................................................................................................................................... 9
3.6 Topography ................................................................................................................................. 10
3.7 Major Lakes, Rivers, and Watersheds .......................................................................................... 10
Section 4. Risk Assessment ...................................................................................................................... 12
4.1 Hazard Identification ................................................................................................................... 12
4.1.1 Existing Plans ....................................................................................................................... 12
4.1.2 National Hazard Records ..................................................................................................... 12
4.1.3 FEMA Disaster Information ................................................................................................. 13
4.1.4 Hazard Ranking Methodology ............................................................................................. 15
4.1.5 Risk Priority Index ................................................................................................................ 15
4.1.6 Jurisdictional Hazard Ranking .............................................................................................. 16
4.2 Vulnerability Assessment ............................................................................................................ 18
4.2.1 Asset Inventory .................................................................................................................... 18
4.3 Risk Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 19
4.3.1 GIS and Hazus-MH ............................................................................................................... 19
4.3.2 Tornado Hazard ................................................................................................................... 20
4.3.3 Earthquake Hazard .............................................................................................................. 27
4.3.4 Hazardous Material Storage and Transportation Hazard .................................................... 37
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
iv
4.3.5 Thunderstorm Hazard ......................................................................................................... 45
4.3.6 Flooding Hazard ................................................................................................................... 49
4.3.7 Ground Failure Hazard ........................................................................................................ 55
4.3.8 Winter Storm Hazard ........................................................................................................... 61
4.3.9 Dam and Levee Failure ........................................................................................................ 63
4.3.10 Disease Outbreaks, Epidemics, and Pandemics ................................................................... 66
Section 5. Mitigation Strategies ............................................................................................................... 72
5.1 Existing Hazard Mitigation Policies, Programs and Resources ..................................................... 72
5.1.1 Successful Mitigation Projects ............................................................................................. 72
5.1.2 National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) ........................................................................... 73
5.1.3 Jurisdiction Ordinances ....................................................................................................... 75
5.1.4 Fire Insurance Ratings ......................................................................................................... 76
5.2 Mitigation Goals .......................................................................................................................... 77
5.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Strategies .................................................................................... 77
5.4 Prioritization of Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Strategies .......................................................... 84
Section 6. Plan Implementation and Maintenance .................................................................................. 87
6.1 Implementation through Existing Programs ................................................................................ 87
6.2 Monitoring, Evaluation, and Updating the MHMP ...................................................................... 87
Definitions ................................................................................................................................................... 89
Acronyms .................................................................................................................................................... 91
Appendices .................................................................................................................................................. 93
Appendix A. MHMP Meeting Minutes ..................................................................................................... 94
Appendix B. Local Press Release and Newspaper Articles ..................................................................... 108
Appendix C. Adopting Resolutions ........................................................................................................ 110
Appendix D. Historical Hazards.............................................................................................................. 111
Appendix E. List of Essential Facilities.................................................................................................... 112
Appendix F. Critical Facilities Map ......................................................................................................... 114
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 1. Introduction Page 1
Section 1. Introduction
Hazard mitigation is any sustained action to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to human life and property
from hazards. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) makes reducing hazards one of its
primary goals; hazard-mitigation planning and the subsequent implementation of mitigation projects,
measures, and policies is a primary mechanism in achieving FEMA’s goal.
The Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan (MHMP) is a requirement of the Federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000
(DMA 2000). The development of a local government plan is required in order to maintain eligibility for
certain federal disaster assistance and hazard mitigation funding programs. In order for the National
Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) communities to be eligible for future mitigation funds, they must adopt
an MHMP.
In recognition of the importance of planning in mitigation activities, FEMA created Hazus Multi-Hazard
(Hazus-MH), a powerful geographic information system (GIS)-based disaster risk assessment tool. This
tool enables communities of all sizes to estimate losses from floods, hurricanes, earthquakes, and other
natural hazards and to measure the impact of various mitigation practices that might help reduce those
losses. The Illinois Emergency Management Agency (IEMA) has determined that Hazus-MH should play a
critical role in the risk assessments performed in Illinois.
Franklin County completed their first Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan in 2009. Throughout the five-year
planning cycle, the Franklin County Emergency Management Agency and Mitigation Planning Team
reconvened to monitor, evaluate, and update the plan on an annual basis. The Natural Hazards Research
and Mitigation Group at Southern Illinois University Carbondale (SIU), Greater Egypt Regional Planning
and Development Commission (Greater Egypt) and Franklin County have joined efforts in updating the
County’s first mitigation plan. The update process addressed changes in the probability and impact of
specific hazards to the county, as well as changes in land-use, population, and demographics. The plan
incorporates detailed GIS and Hazus-MH Level 2 analyses to improve the risk assessment, and finally
revised and updated mitigation strategies. This document hereby serves as Franklin County’s Multi-
Hazard Mitigation Plan update.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 2. Planning Process Page 2
Section 2. Planning Process
2.1 T imel ine The MHMP update process is broken into a series of four meetings. These meetings were organized by
SIU, Greater Egypt and hosted by the Franklin County Emergency Management Agency. At these
meetings, various tasks were completed by SIU, Greater Egypt, and the Franklin County Mitigation
Planning Team.
Meeting 1: Introduction of the MHMP process and organize resources. SIU gathered local resources that contributed to the detailed county risk assessment and presented the county’s historical hazards. Based on this information, the Planning Team identified natural hazards to include in the plan, and ranked hazards by potential damages and occurrences. Meeting 2: SIU presented the draft risk assessment, derived from the Hazus-MH and GIS modeling of the identified disasters, to the Planning Team. The general public was invited to this meeting through a series of newspaper articles and/or radio spots. At the end of the meeting, SIU encouraged the general public to ask questions and provide input to the planning process, fulfilling one of FEMA’s requirements for public input. Meeting 3: This meeting also consisted of a “brainstorming session.” The Planning Team lent local knowledge to identify and prioritize mitigation strategies and projects that can address the threats identified in the risk assessment. FEMA requires the plan to contain mitigation strategies specific to each hazard and for each incorporated area within the county. At this meeting, SIU and Greater Egypt presented options for funding implementation of different mitigation strategies, including a written guide to be distributed to all participants. Meeting 4: The Planning Team reviewed the draft plan and, proposed revisions, and accepted the plan after SIU incorporated the necessary changes. Subsequently, SIU forwarded the county MHMP to the mitigation staff at the Illinois Emergency Management Agency (IEMA) for review prior to submitting it to FEMA.
2.2 Jur isd ict ion Part ic ipat ion Information Approximately thirty-one jurisdictions participated in the development of this MHMP with the intent of
formally adopting the plan and subsequently fulfill the requirements of the DMA 2000. Various
representatives from each jurisdictions were present at the meetings (see Section 2.3 Planning Team
Information). Each jurisdiction falls under the one of the following categories: County, City, Village, Town,
School, or Non-Profit Organization.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 2. Planning Process Page 3
2.3 Planning Team Information Ryan Buckingham, Franklin County EMA Coordinator, heads the Planning Team. The Planning Team includes representatives from various county departments, municipalities, and public and private utilities. Members of the Planning Team have a common vested interest in the County’s long-term strategy to reduce disaster losses and break the cycle of disaster damage, reconstruction, and repeated damage. All members of the Planning Team actively participated in the meetings, reviewed and provided comments on the draft plan, participated in the public input process and the county’s formal adoption of the plan.
Franklin County Planning Team Members Jurisdiction Name Title
Franklin County
Ryan Buckingham Director of Emergency Management
Gary Little Deputy Director of Emergency Management
Rich Good Emergency Planning Specialist
Randall Crocker County Board Chairman
Ronda Koch Director of Emergency Preparedness Bi-County Health Dept.
Benton Gary Kraft Mayor
Erin Steinsultz Library Director
Buckner John Coder Mayor
Christopher Gary Bartolotti Mayor
Ewing Kay Hood Supervisor
Freeman Spur Curt Spaven Mayor
Hanaford Mary Mosley Village President
Macedonia
North City Dennis Harland Village President
Orient
Royalton Charles Brandon Mayor
Sesser Jason Ashmore Mayor
Thompsonville James Harris Mayor
Valier Martin Buchanan Village President
West City Shirley Smith Village Clerk
West Frankfort Tom Jordan Mayor
Zeigler Dennis Mitchell Mayor
Franklin Hospital Lori Hall Administration Assistant
Southern Illinois Healthcare Mike Maddox Regional Disaster Preparedness Coordinator
Participating Jurisdictions
Franklin County Sesser Akin CCSD #91 Benton Thompsonville Benton CCSD #47 Buckner Valier Benton CHSD #103 Christopher West City Christopher CUSD #99 Ewing West Frankfort Ewing Northern CCSD #115 Freeman Spur Zeigler Frankfort CUSD #168 Hanaford Franklin Hosptial Sesser-Valier CUSD #196 Macedonia Southern Illinois Healthcare Thomsponville CUSD #174 North City Rend Lake Conservancy District Zeigler-Roylaton CUSD #188 Orient Rend Lake College Royalton John A. Logan College
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 2. Planning Process Page 4
Jurisdiction Name Title
Woody Throne Vice President of Community Affairs
Rend Lake Conservancy District Robert Clodi Project Manager
Ameren Timothy Banks Senior Emergency Response Specialist
Rend Lake College Damon Sims Deputy Chief of Police
John A. Logan College Darren Pulley Dean for Workforce Dev. & Community Edu.
Akin CCSD #91 Kelly Clark Superintendent
Benton CCSD #47 Jay Goble Superintendent
Benton CHSD #103 Ryan Miller Assistant Principal
Christopher CUSD #99 Richard Towers Superintendent
Ewing Northern CCSD #115 Kristin Ing Principal / Superintendent
Frankfort CUSD #168 Greg Goins Superintendent
Sesser-Valier CUSD #196 Jason Henry Superintendent
Thompsonville CUSD #174 Chris Grant Superintendent
Zeigler-Royalton CUSD #188 George Wilkerson Superintendent
The DMA 2000 planning regulations require that Planning Team members from each jurisdiction actively participate in the MHMP process. The Planning Team was actively involved on the following components:
Attending the MHMP meetings
Providing available assessment and parcel data and historical hazard information
Reviewing and providing comments on the draft plans
Coordinating and participating in the public input process
Coordinating the formal adoption of the plan by the county
The first MHMP update meeting was held in Benton, Illinois on September 26th, 2014. Representatives from SIU explained the rationale behind the MHMP update process and answered questions from the participants. SIU representatives also provided an overview of GIS/Hazus-MH, described the timeline and the process of mitigation planning. The Franklin County Planning Team assembled for four
formal meetings. Each meeting was approximately two
hours in length. Additional meetings were held outside of
the four formal meetings. Appendix A includes the
minutes for all meetings. During these meetings, the
Planning Team successfully identified critical facilities,
reviewed hazard data and maps, identified and assessed
the effectiveness of existing mitigation measures,
established mitigation projects for the future, and assisted
with preparation of the public participation information.
2.4 Publ ic Involvement The Franklin County EMA solicited public input throughout the planning process and a public meeting was
held on March 26th, 2015 to review the County’s risk assessment. Appendix A contains the minutes from
the public meeting. Appendix B contains press releases and/or articles sent to local newspapers
throughout the MHMP development process.
Planning Meetings
MEETING 1 Sept 26th, 2014
MEETING 2 March 26th, 2015
MEETING 3 June 24th, 2015 July 22nd, 2015
MEETING 4 November 17th, 2015 December 11th, 2015
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 2. Planning Process Page 5
2.5 Neighbor ing Community Involvement The Planning Team invited participation from various representatives of county government, local city
and town governments, community groups, local businesses, and universities. The Planning Team also
invited participation from adjacent counties to obtain their involvement in the planning process.
Neighboring Community Participation Person Participating Neighboring Jurisdiction Title/Organization
Derek Misener Jackson County EMA Coordinator Steve Lueker Jefferson County EMA Coordinator David Searby Perry County EMA Coordinator Kelly Urhahn Williamson County EMA Coordinator
2.6 Review of Technical Documents The Franklin County Planning Team identified technical documents from key agencies to assist in the
planning process. These documents include land use plans, comprehensive plans, emergency response
plans, municipal ordinances, and building codes. The planning process incorporated the existing natural
hazard mitigation elements from previous planning efforts. The following technical data, reports, and
studies were utilized:
Federal Emergency Management Agency Developing the Mitigation Plan (April 2003) Mitigation Ideas (January 2003) Local Mitigation Planning Handbook Flood Insurance Study (November 2009)
United State Census Bureau County Profile Information 2010 Census Data American Community Survey (2009-2013)
United States Department of Transportation PHMSA Hazardous Materials Incident Data
United States Geological Survey Earthquake Data
United States Army Corps of Engineers National Inventory of Dams National Levee Database
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Preparedness and Response Framework for Influenza Pandemics Interim Pre-pandemic Planning Guide Foodborne Outbreak Database
NOAA / National Water Service Storm Prediction Center Severe Weather Data
NOAA National Climatic Data Center Climate Data
Illinois Emergency Management Agency 2013 Illinois Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazardous Materials Incident Reports
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency 2014 303d Listed Waters and Watershed Maps
Illinois State Water Survey Climate Data
Illinois Department of Natural Resources Repetitive Loss Data Geologic and Ground Failure Data Dam and Levee Data
Illinois State Geological Survey Geologic and Ground Failure Data
Greater Egypt Regional Planning and Development Commission
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy 2010-2014
Franklin County 2013 Assessment Records 2013 Countywide GIS Parcel Database 2009 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
2.7 Adopt ion by Local Government Upon IEMA and FEMA approval, the Planning Team presented and recommended the plan to the County Board of Commissioners for formal adoption. The plan was formally adopted by the Franklin County Board on <adoption date>. The Planning Team worked with the County and its jurisdictions to ensure all parties formally adopted the plan. Appendix C contains the Adopting Resolutions for each participating jurisdiction.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 3. County Profile Page 6
Section 3. County Profile
3.1 County Background Franklin County organized and claimed its boundaries from Gallatin and White Counties in 1818. In 1839,
Williamson County’s acquisition of Franklin County’s southern territory reformed the county into its
current political boundaries. Franklin County was named after a philosopher, statesman, diplomatist,
author, printer, member of the Continental Congress, Ambassador to France, and (before the Revolution)
Deputy Postmaster General of the British Colonies in America—Benjamin Franklin. The original county
seat, from 1818–1826, was located three miles east of West Frankfort at the house of Moses Garret. From
1826–1839, the county seat was moved to West Frankfort. It was finally relocated to Benton in 1839 and
remains there as the current county seat.
Franklin County is located in the heart of southern Illinois (Figure 3-1). It is bounded on the north by
Jefferson County, on the south by Williamson County, on the east by Hamilton and Saline counties, and
on the west by Perry and Jackson Counties. Its relation to major urban areas is as follows: 100 miles east-
southeast of St. Louis, Missouri; 169 miles south-southeast of Springfield, Illinois; 301 miles south-
southwest of Chicago, Illinois.
Figure 3-1. Franklin County and Surrounding Region
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 3. County Profile Page 7
Franklin County’s population has remained relatively stable over the past three decades. The major sources of economic activity include manufacturing, public administration, retail trade, arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation, and food services. New development in Franklin County tends to focus along I-57 around the cities of Benton and West Frankfort. Centrally located, Franklin County offers a host of amenities such as shopping centers, hotels, restaurants, and entertainment. Franklin County is home to Wayne Fitzgerrell State Park, a 3,330-acre state park bordering Rend Lake near Benton, IL. The northern portion of Rend Lake is shared with Jefferson County. Rend Lake is the largest area of public land in Franklin County, drawing significant numbers of tourists who contribute to the local economy. Rend Lake is managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Illinois Department of Natural Resources and the Rend Lake Conservancy District, which provide vital services to lake visitors and the community. The lake offers fishing, hunting, and water recreation facilities and activities. Other communities within the county offer similar amenities, such as restaurants, entertainment, and shopping on a rural scale.
3.2 Demographics According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Franklin County’s 2013 population estimate is 39,202, a decrease of
0.9% from 2010. The population is spread throughout twelve townships: Barren, Benton, Browning, Cave,
Denning, Eastern, Ewing, Frankfort, Goode, Northern, Six Mile, and Tyrone. Figure 3-2 displays the
breakdown of population by township from the 2010 Census.
Figure 3-2. Franklin County 2010 Population by Township
3.3 Economy and Industry Franklin County is strategically located along the bustling business corridor of Interstate 57. The diversified
Franklin County workforce is spread across agriculture, forestry, construction, manufacturing, retail,
healthcare and social assistance, hospitality, education, and transportation. Table 3-1 lists the top
employers and the approximate number of employees in Franklin County. Ten employers have
employment rolls of over 100. Education services, health care, social assistance, retail trade and
manufacturing employ 50% of the workforce (American Community Survey 2013). The 2013 annual per
capita income in the county is $20,394, compared to an Illinois average of $29,666.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 3. County Profile Page 8
Table 3-1. Franklin County’s Major Employers
Employer Industry Approximate Number of
Employees
Crownline Boats Inc. Boat Building And Repairing 600 Centerstone Counseling Services 300 Benton School District Elementary And Secondary Schools 215 Franklin Hospital General Medical And Surgical Hospitals 197 Wal-Mart Supercenter (Benton) Department Stores 165 Franklin County Government 150 Three Angels Broadcasting Television Stations & Broadcasting Co. 150 State of Illinois Government 116 Zeigler Royalton Community School Elementary And Secondary Schools 100 West-Frankfort Community Unit 168 Elementary And Secondary Schools 100-249
Source: Franklin County Economic Development Corporation
3.4 Land Use and Development Trends Pre-European settlement, Franklin County was densely forested with few areas of prairie. Since
settlement, agriculture, coal mining, and urbanization have dramatically altered the county’s land cover.
Figure 3-3 depicts the current land uses in Franklin County. Today, agriculture is the predominant land
cover in the county. This fact did not result because of great agricultural capabilities of the land as a major
agricultural producer; neither did it occur because of maximum economic development potential resting
in agricultural pursuits. Rather it is a result of the existence of large volumes of land which cannot
rationally be occupied by major urban uses within the foreseeable future. As a result many agricultural
uses have only limited agricultural potential. The eastern portions of the county are the primary areas of
agriculture use. Additional scattered areas are located within the urban core in segments which need not
be utilized for urban expansion. These agricultural areas become the overflow areas of future growth.
Corn is the primary crop, followed by soybeans, winter wheat, hay, and oats.
In recent years, residential developments tend to focus in the West Frankfort and Benton areas.
Residential land use has had few significant developments within the county at this time. The largest
communities within the county are the cities of West Frankfort (8,110) and Benton (7,054) according to
the U.S. Census 2013 population estimates.
Commercial land use has historically been, and continues to be, concentrated within the business districts
of the incorporated municipalities of the county. However, the most recent commercial growth has
occurred in and around the city of West Frankfort. Franklin County as a whole is experiencing minor
commercial development at this time. Industrial land use has been strategically planned and concentrated
within Benton Industrial Park, Benton Airport Industrial Park, and Franklin County Industrial Park. Benton
is the predominant location for most of the industries in the county.
Coal mining was an important industry in the Southern Illinois Region between the 1930s and 1980s. From
1990 through today, the importance of coal mining to the region and Franklin County has significantly
lessened due to more stringent air quality regulations. Regardless, Southern Illinois’s coal mining history,
particularly strip mining, has left an indelible mark on Franklin County. In areas that were strip mined,
particularly prior to Surface Mine Reclamation Action of 1977, the land has been left unsuitable for
agriculture or significant commercial or residential development. These areas often contain large piles of
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 3. County Profile Page 9
mine spoil and deep pits filled with water that alter surface water drainage. Fortunately, strip mining in
Franklin County is relatively nonexistent.
Public land use in Franklin County includes schools, parks, playgrounds, public utilities, and transportation
facilities. Rend Lake Conservancy District is the most significant public land use shared between Franklin
and Jefferson Counties. Other major areas include the Benton Municipal Airport, Wayne Fitzgerrell State
Park, Franklin Community Park, John A. Logan West Frankfort Extension Center, and Benton Community
Park District.
Figure 3-3. Land Use in Franklin County
3.5 Cl imate Franklin County climate is typical of Southern Illinois and generally characterized by hot dry summers and
cool wet winters. The variables of temperatures, precipitation, and snowfall can vary greatly from one
year to the next. In summer, the average low is 65.3° F and average high is 88.5° F; however, daily
maximum temperatures often exceed 100° F for the period of time (several weeks) between June and
September.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 3. County Profile Page 10
During the fall and into the spring, freezing temperatures can occur any time between September and
May. The average low and high temperatures in January are 13.3° F and 40.4° F, respectively. Average
annual precipitation is 43.19 inches. While the winters are generally cool, i.e. temperatures are above
freezing most days. Extended periods (days to a couple of weeks) of sub-freezing temperatures often
occur and are sometimes accompanied by significant amounts of ice and snow.
3.6 Topography Franklin County is located in the Mount Vernon Hill Country physiographic sub-division of the Till Plains. Figure 3-4 depicts the physiographic divisions within Franklin County. The Mount Vernon Hill Country is characterized by low rolling hills and broad alluvial valleys along the major streams. The relief in this region is not pronounced. Upland prairies are flat to moderately hilly, and the valleys are shallow. The land surface is primarily controlled by bedrock, which has been only slightly modified by glacial drift deposits. While the southern boundary of the Mount Vernon Hill Country lies within a few miles of the limits of glaciations, moraine ridges are essentially absent in the area. The highest elevation(s) (~578 feet above sea level) in Franklin County are found in the central northern part of the county near Ewing. The lowest elevation(s) (~370 feet above sea level) are found in the southwest portion of the county near Zeigler.
Figure 3-4. Physiographic Divisions of Franklin County and Surrounding Terrain
3.7 Major Lakes, R ivers, and Watersheds Of the 102 Illinois Counties, Franklin County ranks 8th in portion of county covered by open water, most
of which is lakes and rivers. Nearly 14,000 acres are covered by lakes, rivers and streams. Figure 3-5 depicts
the major drainage basins in Franklin County. Franklin County lies on the dividing ridge between the Ohio
and Mississippi Rivers. The county crosses two eight-digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) Watersheds: Big
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 3. County Profile Page 11
Muddy Watershed and Saline Watershed. There are nine significant lakes in Franklin County: Sesser,
Hamilton, New Christopher, New West Frankfort, Old West Frankfort, Benton, Moses, Rend and Zeigler.
The Big Muddy Watershed enters into the county from the north and northeast. The majority of the
county lies within this watershed, generally sloping toward the southwest, and is drained by the Big
Muddy River, the water of which flows into the Mississippi River.
The Saline Watershed covers a small portion on the southeast corner of the county and lies to the east of
the Big Muddy Watershed with a general slope toward the southeast; it is drained by the Saline River,
which flows into the Ohio River.
Figure 3-5. Major drainage basins in Franklin County
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 12
Section 4. Risk Assessment
The goal of mitigation is to reduce future hazard impacts including loss of life, property damage, disruption
to local and regional economies, and the expenditure of public and private funds for recovery. Sound
mitigation requires a rigorous risk assessment. A risk assessment involves quantifying the potential loss
resulting from a disaster by assessing the vulnerability of buildings, infrastructure, and people. This
assessment identifies the characteristics and potential consequences of a disaster, how much the disaster
could affect the community, and the impact on community assets. This risk assessment consists of three
components—hazard identification, vulnerability assessment, and risk analysis.
4.1 Hazard Ident i f icat ion
4.1.1 Existing Plans The Planning Team identified technical documents from key agencies to assist in the planning process and
incorporated the natural hazard mitigation elements from previous 2009 Franklin County Multi-Hazard
Mitigation Planning efforts. Several other documents were used to profile historical hazards and guide
the Planning Team during the hazard ranking exercise. Section 2-6 contains a complete list of the technical
documents utilized to develop this plan.
4.1.2 National Hazard Records To assist the Planning Team, historical storm event data from the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC)
was complied. NCDC records are estimates of damages reported to the National Weather Service from
various local, state, and federal sources. However, these estimates are often preliminary in nature and
may not match the final assessment of economic and property losses.
The NCDC database included 568 reported meteorological events in Franklin County from 1950-2014 (the
most updated information as of the date of this plan). The following hazard-profile sections each include
a summary table of events related to each hazard type. Table 4-1 summarizes the meteorological hazards
reported for Franklin County. Figure 4-1 summarize the relative frequency of NCDC reported
meteorological hazards and the percent of total damage associated with each hazard for Franklin County.
Full details of individual hazard events are on the NCDC website. In addition to NCDC data, Storm
Prediction Center (SPC) data associated with tornadoes, strong winds, and hail was mapped using SPC-
recorded latitudes and longitudes. Appendix D includes a map of these events.
Table 4-1. Summary of Meteorological Hazards Reported by the NCDC for Franklin County
Hazards
Time Period Number of Events Property Damage Deaths Injuries Start End
Flooding 1996 2014 74 $13,337,000 0 1
Severe Thunderstorms 1955 2014 251 $9,446,000 0 7
Tornadoes 1957 2013 22 $5,867,000 1 31
Winter Storms 1996 2014 159 $330,000 2 15
Extreme Heat 1997 2013 61 $0 0 5
Wildfire 2011 2011 1 $0 0 0
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 13
Figure 4-1. Distribution of NCDC Meteorological Hazards for Franklin County
4.1.3 FEMA Disaster Information Since 1957, FEMA has declared 53 major disasters and 7 emergencies for the State of Illinois. Emergency
declarations allow states to access FEMA funds for Public Assistance (PA); disaster declarations allow for
even more PA funding, including Individual Assistance (IA) and the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
(HMGP). Franklin County has received federal aid for six declared disasters and two emergencies since
1965. Table 4-2 lists specific information for each disaster declaration in Franklin County. Figure 4-2
depicts the disasters and emergencies that have been declared for the State of Illinois and Franklin County
since 1965.
Table 4-2. Details of FEMA-declared Emergencies and Disasters in Franklin County
Declaration Number Date of Declaration Description
1991 6/7/2011 Severe Storms and Flooding
1850 7/2/2009 Severe Storms, Flooding, and Tornadoes
3230 9/7/2005 Hurricane Katrina Evacuation
3199 2/1/2005 Record/Near Record Snow
1416 5/21/2002 Severe Storms, Tornadoes and Flooding
1112 5/6/1996 Severe Storms and Flooding
684 6/6/1983 Severe Storms, Tornadoes and Flooding
373 4/26/1973 Severe Storms and Flooding
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 14
Figure 4-2. FEMA-declared Emergencies and Disasters in Illinois
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 15
4.1.4 Hazard Ranking Methodology Based on Planning Team input, national datasets, and existing plans, the Franklin County Planning Team
re-ranked the list of hazards from the 2009 MHMP. These hazards ranked the highest based on the Risk
Priority Index discussed in Section 4.1.5. In addition to the identified hazards, the Franklin County Planning
Team identified disease epidemic / pandemic as a public health hazard. This plan includes a section
devoted to disease epidemic / pandemic but it should be noted that it is not included in the ranked list of
hazards.
4.1.5 Risk Priority Index The Risk Priority Index (RPI) quantifies risk as the product of hazard probability and magnitude so Planning
Team members can prioritize mitigation strategies for high-risk-priority hazards. Planning Team members
use historical hazard data to determine the probability, combined with knowledge of local conditions to
determine the possible severity of a hazard. Tables 4-3 and 4-4 display the criteria the Planning Team
used to quantify hazard probability and magnitude.
Table 4-3. Hazard Probability Ranking
Probability Characteristics
4 – Highly Likely Event is probable within the next calendar year This event has occurred, on average, once every 1-2 years in the past
3 – Likely Event is probable within the next 10 years Event has a 10-50% chance of occurring in any given year This event has occurred, on average, once every 3-10 years in the past
2 – Possible Event is probable within the next 50 years Event has a 2-10% chance of occurring in any given year This event has occurred, on average, once every 10-50 years in the past
1 – Unlikely Event is probable within the next 200 years Event has a 0.5-2% chance of occurring in any given year This event has occurred, on average, once every 50-200 years in the past
Franklin County Hazard List
TORNADOES
EARTHQUAKES
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RELEASE
SEVERE THUNDERSTORM
FLOODING
GROUND FAILURE
WINTER STORMS
DAM / LEVEE FAILURE
DISEASE EPIDEMICS / PANDEMICS
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 16
Table 4-4. Hazard Severity Ranking
Magnitude/Severity Characteristics
8 – Catastrophic Multiple deaths Complete shutdown of facilities for 30 or more days More than 50% of property is severely damaged
4 – Critical Injuries and/or illnesses result in permanent disability Complete shutdown of critical facilities for at least 14 days More than 25% of property is severely damaged
2 – Limited Injuries and/or illnesses do not result in permanent disability Complete shutdown of critical facilities for more than seven days More than 10% of property is severely damaged
1 – Negligible
Injuries and/or illnesses are treatable with first aid Minor quality of life lost Shutdown of critical facilities and services for 24 hours or less Less than 10% of property is severely damaged
The product of hazard probability and magnitude is the RPI. The Planning Team members ranked specified
hazards based on the RPI, with larger numbers corresponding to greater risk. After evaluating the
calculated RPI, the Planning Team adjusted the ranking to better suit the County. Table 4-5 identifies the
RPI and adjusted ranking for each hazard specified by the Planning Team.
Table 4-5. Franklin County Hazard Priority Index and Ranking
Hazard Probability Magnitude/Severity Risk Priority Index Rank
Tornadoes 3 5 15 1
Earthquakes 2 7 14 2
Hazardous Materials Release 3 3 9 3
Severe Thunderstorms 3 2 6 4
Flooding 3 2 6 5
Ground Failure 3 2 6 6
Winter Storms 4 1 4 7
Dam / Levee Failure 1 4 4 8
4.1.6 Jurisdictional Hazard Ranking Each jurisdiction created its own RPI because hazard susceptibility may differ by jurisdiction. During the
five-year review of the plan, the Planning Team will update this table to ensure these jurisdictional
rankings accurately reflect each community’s assessment of these hazards. Table 4-6 lists the jurisdictions
and their respective hazard rankings (Ranking 1 being the highest concern). The individual jurisdictions
made these rankings at Meeting 1.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 17
Table 4-6. Hazard Ranking by Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction Tornadoes Earthquakes HAZMAT Severe Storms Flooding
Ground Failure
Winter Storms
Dam / Levee Failure
Extreme Heat
Pandemic /
Epidemic
Benton
Buckner
Christopher
Ewing
Freeman Spur 1 2 6 3 5 8 4 - 7 -
Hanaford 1 2 6 3 5 - 4 - - -
Macedonia
North City 1 3 9 2 4 6 5 8 7 -
Orient 1 2 6 3 5 7 4 - 8 9
Royalton
Sesser 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 - -
Thompsonville
Valier
West City
West Frankfort
Zeigler 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 - -
Franklin Hospital
1 2 3 5 4 8 6 7 - -
Southern Illinois Health Care
1 3 2 6 4 - 7 4 - 5
Rend Lake Conservancy District
2 1 6 3 4 7 3 4 - -
Rend lake College
2 1 6 3 4 7 4 5 - -
John A. Logan College
1 2 6 3 7 5 4 8 - -
Akin CCSD #91
Benton CCSD #47
Benton Consolidated High School District #103
1 3 4 2 5 7 6 8 - -
Christopher Unit School District #99
Ewing Northern CCSD #115
1 4 5 2 7 6 3 - - -
Frankfort CUSD #168
Sesser-Valier CUSD #196
1 4 5 2 7 6 3 8 - -
Thompsonville CUSD #174
Zeigler-Royalton CUSD #188
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 18
4.2 Vulnerabi l i ty Assessment
4.2.1 Asset Inventory
Processes and Sources for Identifying Assets Before meeting one, the Planning Team used their resources to update the list of critical facilities from
the 2009 MHMP. Local GIS data was used to verify the locations of all critical facilities. SIU GIS analysts
incorporated these updates and corrections to the Hazus-MH data tables prior to performing the risk
assessment. The updated Hazus-MH inventory contributed to a Level 2 analysis, which improved the
accuracy of the risk assessment. Franklin County also provided local assessment and parcel data to
estimate the actual number of buildings susceptible to damage for the risk assessment.
Essential Facilities List Table 4-7 identifies the number of essential facilities identified in Franklin County. Essential facilities are
a subset of critical facilities. Appendix E include a comprehensive list of the essential facilities in Franklin
County and Appendix F displays a large format map of the locations of the critical facilities within the
county.
Table 4-7. Franklin County's Essential Facilities Facility Number of Facilities
Emergency Operations Centers 2
Fire Stations 14
Police Stations 13
Schools 24
Care Facilities 24
Facility Replacement Costs Table 4-8 identifies facility replacement costs and total building exposure. Franklin County provided local
assessment data for updates to replacement costs. Tax-exempt properties such as government buildings,
schools, religious and non-profit structures were excluded from this study because they do not have an
assessed value. Table 4-8 also includes the estimated number of buildings within each occupancy class.
Table 4-8. Franklin County‘s Building Exposure General Occupancy Estimated Total Buildings Total Building Exposure
Residential 16,693 $989,203,026
Agriculture 311 $5,662,245
Commercial 1,517 $11,193,233,715
Industrial 100 $564,944,130
Total: 18,621 $12,753,043,116
Future Development Franklin County is expected to see a modest increase in population due to the expansion of existing
distribution centers, light industry, and the creation of new opportunities in the service industry such as
retail stores, restaurants, and hotels. Most of this expansion is expected to take place within the city limits
of Benton and West Frankfort within close proximity to transportation corridors such as Interstate 57.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 19
4.3 Risk Analys is
4.3.1 GIS and Hazus-MH The third step in the risk assessment is the risk analysis, which quantifies the risk to the population,
infrastructure, and economy of the community. The hazards were quantified using GIS analyses and
Hazus-MH where possible. This process reflects a Level 2 Hazus-MH analysis. A level 2 Hazus-MH analysis
involves substituting selected Hazus-MH default data with local data and improving the accuracy of model
predictions.
Updates to the default Hazus-MH data include:
Updating the Hazus-MH defaults, critical facilities, and essential facilities based on the most recent available data sources.
Reviewing, revising, and verifying locations of critical and essential point facilities with local input.
Applying the essential facility updates (schools, medical care facilities, fire stations, police stations, and EOCs) to the Hazus-MH model data.
Updating Hazus-MH reports of essential facility losses.
The following assumptions were made during analysis:
Hazus-MH aggregate data was used to model the building exposure for all earthquake analyses. It is assumed that the aggregate data is an accurate representation of Franklin County.
The analyses were restricted to the county boundaries. Events that occur near the county boundaries do not contain damage assessments from adjacent counties.
For each tax-assessment parcel, it is assumed there is only one building that bares all the associated values (both structure and content).
For each parcel, it is assumed that all structures are wood-framed, one-story, slab-on-grade structures, unless otherwise stated in assessment records. These assumptions are based on sensitivity analyses of Hazus and regional knowledge.
Depending upon the analysis options and the quality of data the user inputs, Hazus-MH generates a
combination of site-specific and aggregated loss estimates. Hazus-MH is not intended as a substitute for
detailed engineering studies; it is intended to serve as a planning aid for communities interested in
assessing their risk to flood-, earthquake-, and hurricane-related hazards. This plan does not fully
document the processes and procedures completed in its development, but this documentation is
available upon request. Table 4-9 indicates the analysis type (i.e. GIS, Hazus-MH, or historical records)
used for each hazard assessment.
Table 4-9. Risk Assessment Tool Used for Each Hazard
Hazard Risk Assessment Tool(s)
Tornadoes GIS-based
Earthquakes Hazus-MH
Hazmat Release GIS-based
Severe Thunderstorm Historical Records
Flooding Hazus-MH
Ground Failure GIS-based
Winter Storms Historical Records
Disease Epidemic / Pandemic Historical Records
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 20
4.3.2 Tornado Hazard
Hazard Definition Tornadoes are violently rotating columns of air extending from thunderstorms to the ground. Funnel
clouds are rotating columns of air not in contact with the ground; however, the violently rotating column
of air can reach the ground quickly and become a tornado. If the funnel cloud picks up and blows debris,
it has reached the ground and is a tornado.
Tornadoes are a significant risk to Illinois and its citizens. Tornadoes can occur at any time on any day.
The unpredictability of tornadoes makes them one of Illinois’ most dangerous hazards. Tornado winds
are violently destructive in developed and populated areas. Current estimates place maximum wind
velocity at about 300 miles per hour, but higher values can occur. A wind velocity of 200 miles per hour
results in a pressure of 102.4 pounds per square foot—a load that exceeds the tolerance limits of most
buildings. Thus, it is easy to understand why tornadoes can devastate the communities they hit.
Tornadoes are classified according to the Enhanced Fujita tornado intensity scale. The Enhanced Fujita
scale ranges from intensity EF0, with effective wind speeds of 40 to 70 miles per hour, to EF5 tornadoes,
with effective wind speeds of over 260 miles per hour. Table 4-10 outlines the Enhanced Fujita intensity
scale.
Table 4-10. Enhanced Fujita Tornado Rating Enhanced
Fujita Number
Estimated Wind Speed Path Width Path Length Description of Destruction
0 Gale 40-72 mph 6-17 yards 0.3-0.9 miles Light damage, some damage to chimneys, branches broken, signboards damaged, shallow-rooted trees blown over.
1 Moderate 73-112 mph 18-55 yards 1.0-3.1 miles Moderate damage, roof surfaces peeled off, mobile homes pushed off foundations, attached garages damaged.
2 Significant 113-157 mph 56-175 yards 3.2-9.9 miles
Considerable damage, entire roofs torn from frame houses, mobile homes demolished, boxcars pushed over, large trees snapped or uprooted.
3 Severe 158-206 mph 176-566 yards 10-31 miles
Severe damage, walls torn from well-constructed houses, trains overturned, most trees in forests uprooted, heavy cars thrown about.
4 Devastating 207-260 mph 0.3-0.9 miles 32-99 miles
Complete damage, well-constructed houses leveled, structures with weak foundations blown off for some distance, large missiles generated.
5 Incredible 261-318 mph 1.0-3.1 miles 100-315 miles
Foundations swept clean, automobiles become missiles and thrown for 100 yards or more, steel-reinforced concrete structures badly damaged.
Previous Occurrences of Tornadoes There have been several occurrences of tornadoes in Franklin County during recent decades. The National
Climatic Data Center (NCDC) database reported twenty-two tornadoes/funnel clouds in Franklin County
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 21
since 1950. Table 4-11 identifies NCDC-recorded tornadoes that caused damage, death, or injury in
Franklin County. Additional details of individual hazard events are on the NCDC website.
Although not recorded in the NCDC data, the Tri-State Tornado remains the most memorable tornado in
Southern Illinois’s history. The tornado tore across Southeast Missouri, Southern Illinois, and Southwest
Indiana. The Tri-State Tornado was a rare event – spanning 219 miles long with an average width of ¾
mile; affected 3 states, 13 counties, over 19 communities. The entire town of Gorham was demolished
and 34 people lost their lives. 541 people were killed and 1,423 were seriously injured as the tornado tore
a path of destruction nearly one mile wide through the towns of Murphysboro, De Soto, Hurst-Bush, and
West Frankfort.
The most recent tornado event occurred in November 2013 when supercell thunderstorms developed
along a pre-frontal low pressure trough over Missouri and then moved east across southern Illinois. A
brief tornado touched down, but no damage was reported.
Table 4-11. NCDC-Recorded Tornadoes That Caused Damage, Death, or Injury in Franklin County Location or
County* Date Scale Deaths Injuries Property Damage
Franklin County 12/18/1957 F4 0 10 $25,000,000
Franklin County 4/27/1971 F3 1 20 $2,500,000
West Frankfort 4/27/1994 F1 0 1 $500,000
Franklin County 2/9/1960 F2 0 0 $250,000
Royalton 4/19/2011 EF1 0 0 $80,000
Mulkeytown 4/19/1996 F1 0 0 $20,000
Benton 4/19/2011 EF1 0 0 $10,000
Mulkeytown 6/8/2009 EF1 0 0 $6,000
Royalton 11/10/2002 F0 0 0 $1,000
Total: 1 31 $28,367,000
*NCDC records are estimates of damage compiled by the National Weather Service from various local, state, and federal sources. However, these estimates are often preliminary in nature and may not match the final assessment of economic and property losses related to a given weather event.
Geographic Location for Tornado Hazard The entire county has the same risk of tornado occurrence. Tornadoes can occur at any location within
the county.
Hazard Extent for Tornado Hazard Historical tornadoes generally moved from southwest to northeast across the county, although many
other tracks are possible, from more southerly to northerly directions. The extent of the hazard varies in
terms of the size of the tornado, its path, and its wind speed.
Risk Identification for Tornado Hazard Based on historical information, the probability of future tornadoes in Franklin County is likely. The
County should expect tornadoes with varying magnitudes to occur in the future. Tornadoes ranked as the
number one hazard according to the Franklin County Planning Team’s risk assessment.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 22
Vulnerability Analysis for Tornado Hazard Tornadoes can occur within any area in the county; therefore, the entire county population and all
buildings are vulnerable to tornadoes. To accommodate this risk, this plan considers all buildings located
within the county as vulnerable. Tables 4-7 and 4-8 display the existing buildings and critical infrastructure
in Franklin County.
Critical Facilities All critical facilities are vulnerable to tornadoes. Critical facilities are susceptible to many of the same
impacts as any other building within the jurisdiction. These impacts vary based on the magnitude of the
tornado but can include structural failure, damaging debris (trees or limbs), roofs blown off or windows
broken by hail or high winds, and loss of facility functionality (e.g., a damaged police station will no longer
be able to serve the community). Table 4-7 lists the types and number of critical facilities for the entire
county and Appendix F displays a large format map of the locations of all critical facilities within the
county.
Building Inventory Table 4-8 lists the building exposure in terms of types and numbers of buildings for the entire county. The
buildings within the county can all expect the same impacts, similar to those discussed for critical facilities.
These impacts include structural failure, damaging debris (trees or limbs), roofs blown off or windows
broken by hail or high winds, and loss of building function (e.g., damaged home will no longer be habitable,
causing residents to seek shelter).
Infrastructure The types of infrastructure that could be impacted during a tornado include roadways, utility lines/pipes,
railroads, and bridges. Since the county’s entire infrastructure is vulnerable, it is important to emphasize
that any number of these structures could become damaged during a tornado. The impacts to these
structures include broken, failed, or impassable roadways, broken or failed utility lines (e.g., loss of power
or gas to community), and railway failure from broken or impassable rail lines. Bridges could fail or become
impassable, causing risk to motorists.
GIS-based Tornado Analysis One tornado scenario was conducted for Franklin County through the City of Christopher, Village of
Buckner, the Village of West City, and the City of Benton. The following analysis quantifies the anticipated
impacts of tornadoes in the county in terms of numbers and types of buildings and infrastructure
damaged.
GIS-overlay modeling was used to determine the potential impacts of an EF4 tornado. The analysis used
a hypothetical path based upon an EF4 tornado event that runs for 21 miles through the Christopher,
Buckner, West City, and Benton. Table 4-12 depicts tornado damage curves and path widths utilized for
Risk Priority Index
Probability x Magnitude = RPI 3 x 5 = 15
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 23
the modeled scenario. The damage curve is based on conceptual wind speeds, path winds, and path
lengths from the Enhanced-Fujita Scale guidelines.
Table 4-12. Tornado Path Widths and Damage Curves
Fujita Scale Path Width (feet) Maximum Expected Damage
5 2,400 100%
4 1,800 100%
3 1,200 80%
2 600 50%
1 300 10%
0 150 0%
Degrees of damage depend on proximity to the path centerline within a given tornado path. The most
intense damage occurs within the center of the damage path, with decreasing amounts of damage away
from the center. To model the EF4 tornado, a hypothetical tornado path was used in GIS with buffers
added (damage zones) around the tornado path. Table 4-13 and Figure 4-3 illustrate the zone analysis.
Figure 4-4 depicts the selected hypothetical tornado path.
Table 4-13. EF4 Tornado Zones and Damage Curves
Zone Buffer (feet) Damage Curve
1 0-150 100%
2 150-300 80%
3 300-600 50%
4 600-900 10%
Figure 4-3. Tornado Analysis (Damage Curves) Using GIS Buffers
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 24
Figure 4-4. Modeled Hypothetical EF4 Tornado Track for Franklin County
Modeled Impacts of the EF4 Tornado The GIS analysis estimates that the modeled EF4 tornado would damage 1,695 buildings. The estimated
building losses are over $2 billion. The building losses are an estimate of building replacement costs
multiplied by the damage percent. Table 4-14 and Figures 4-5 show the results of the EF4 tornado analysis.
Table 4-14. Estimated Building Loss by Occupancy Type
Occupancy Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4
Residential $14,628,308 $12,399,912 $17,537,625 $2,841,782
Agriculture $4,560 $960 $0 $0
Commercial $1,059,302,280 $499,021,752 $814,369,920 $73,513,599
Industrial $0 $81,330 $0 $0
Total: $1,073,935,148 $511,503,954 $831,907,545 $76,355,381
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 25
Figure 4-5. Building Inventory Affected by the EF4 Tornado
Essential Facilities Damage There are twelve essential facility located within 900 feet of the EF4 tornado path. The model predicts that one EOC, two schools, four fire stations and five police station would experience damage across Franklin County. The affected facilities are identified in Table 4-15, and their geographic locations are shown in Figure 4-6.
Table 4-15. Essential Facilities Affected by the EF4 Tornado Modeled for Franklin County
Essential Facility Facility Name
EOC Franklin County Jail
Schools Benton Consolidated High School
Franklin County ROE 21
Fire Departments
Benton Fire Dept.
Christopher Fire Dept.
Buckner Fire Dept.
West City Fire Dept.
Police Departments
Christopher Police Dept.
West City Police Dept.
Franklin County Sheriff
Benton City Police
Buckner Police Dept.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 26
Figure 4-6. Essential Facilities Affected by the EF4 Tornado
Vulnerability to Future Assets/Infrastructure for Tornado Hazard The entire population and all buildings are at risk because tornadoes can occur anywhere within the state,
at any time. Furthermore, any future development in terms of new construction within the county is at
risk. Table 4-8 includes the building exposure for Franklin County. All essential facilities in the county are
at risk. Appendix E include a list of the essential facilities in Franklin County and Appendix F displays a
large format map of the locations of all critical facilities within the county.
Suggestions for Community Development Trends Preparing for severe storms will be enhanced if local officials sponsor a wide range of programs and
initiative to address severe storm preparedness. It is suggested that the county should build new
structures with more sturdy construction, and harden existing structures to lessen the potential impacts
of severe weather. This is particularly import where the future economic expansion is expected to take
place within the city limits of Benton and West Frankfort. Additional warning sirens can warn the
community of approaching storms to ensure the safety of Franklin County residents and minimizing
property damage.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 27
4.3.3 Earthquake Hazard
Hazard Definition An earthquake is the shaking of the earth caused by the energy released when large blocks of rock slip
past each other in the earth’s crust. Most earthquakes occur at tectonic plate boundaries; however, some
earthquakes occur in the middle of plates, for example the New Madrid Seismic Zone or the Wabash Valley
Fault System. Both of these seismic areas have a geologic history of strong quakes, and an earthquake
from either seismic area could possibly affect Illinois counties. There may be other, currently unidentified
faults in the Midwest also capable of producing strong earthquakes.
Strong earthquakes can collapse buildings and infrastructure, disrupt utilities, and trigger landslides,
avalanches, flash floods, fires, and tsunamis. When an earthquake occurs in a populated area, it may
cause death, injury, and extensive property damage. An earthquake might damage essential facilities,
such as fire departments, police departments, and hospitals, disrupting emergency response services in
the affected area. Strong earthquakes may also require mass relocation; however, relocation may be
impossible in the short-term aftermath of a significant event due to damaged transportation
infrastructure and public communication systems.
Earthquakes are usually measured by two criteria: intensity and magnitude (M). Earthquake intensity
qualitatively measures the strength of shaking produced by an earthquake at a certain location and is
determined from effects on people, structures, and the natural environment. Earthquake magnitude
quantitatively measures the energy released at the earthquake’s subsurface source in the crust, or
epicenter. Table 4-16 provides a comparison of magnitude and intensity, and Table 4-17 provides
qualitative descriptions of intensity, for a sense of what a given magnitude might feel like.
Table 4-16. Comparison of Earthquake Magnitude and Intensity Magnitude (M) Typical Maximum Modified Mercalli Intensity
1.0 – 3.0 I
3.0 – 3.9 II – III
4.0 – 4.9 IV – V
5.0 – 5.9 VI – VII
6.0 – 6.9 VII – IX
7.0 and higher VIII or higher
Table 4-17. Abbreviated Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale Mercalli Intensity Description
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable conditions.
II Felt only by a few persons at rest, especially on upper floors of buildings.
III Felt quite noticeably by persons indoors, especially on upper floors of buildings. Many people do not recognize it as an earthquake. Standing motorcars may rock slightly. Vibrations similar to the passing of a truck. Duration estimated.
IV Felt indoors by many, outdoors by few during the day. At night, some awakened. Dishes, windows, doors disturbed; walls make cracking sound. Sensation like heavy truck striking building. Standing motorcars rocked noticeably.
V Felt by nearly everyone; many awakened. Some dishes, windows broken. Unstable objects overturned. Pendulum clocks may stop.
VI Felt by all, many frightened. Some heavy furniture moved; a few instances of fallen plaster. Damage slight.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 28
Mercalli Intensity Description
VII Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction; slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures; considerable damage in poorly built or badly designed structures; some chimneys broken.
VIII
Damage slight in specially designed structures; considerable damage in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse. Damage great in poorly built structures. Fall of chimneys, factory stacks, columns, monuments, and walls. Heavy furniture overturned.
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures; well-designed frame structures thrown out of plumb. Damage great in substantial buildings, with partial collapse. Buildings shifted off foundations.
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations. Rails bent.
XI Few, if any (masonry) structures remain standing. Bridges destroyed. Rails bent greatly.
XII Damage total. Lines of sight and level are distorted. Objects thrown into the air.
Previous Occurrences for Earthquakes Historically, the most significant seismic activity in Illinois is associated with New Madrid Seismic Zone.
The New Madrid Seismic Zone produced three large earthquakes in the central U.S. with magnitudes
estimated between 7.0 and 7.7 on December 16, 1811, January 23, 1812, and February 7, 1812. These
earthquakes caused violent ground cracking and volcano-like eruptions of sediment (sand blows) over an
area >10,500 km2, and uplifted a 50 km by 23 km zone (the Lake County uplift). The shaking was felt over
a total area of over 10 million km2 (the largest felt area of any historic earthquake). The United States
Geological Survey (USGS) and the Center for Earthquake Research and Information (CERI) at the University
of Memphis estimate the probability of a repeat of the 1811-1812 type earthquakes (M7.5-8.0) is 7%-10%
over the next 50 years (USGS Fact Sheet 2006-3125).
Earthquakes measured in Illinois typically vary in magnitude from very low microseismic events of M=1-3
to larger events up to M=5.4. Figure 4-7 depicts the following: (A) location of notable earthquakes in
Illinois region; (B) generalized geologic bedrock map with earthquake epicenters and geologic structures;
(C) geologic and earthquake epicenter map of Franklin County. The most recent earthquake in Illinois—as
of the date of this report—was a M2.3 event in February 2014, approximately 6 miles NNW of Mound
City in Pulaski County. The last earthquake in Illinois to cause minor damage occurred on April 18, 2008
near Mt. Carmel, IL and measured 5.2 in magnitude. Earthquakes resulting in more serious damage have
occurred about every 70 to 90 years and are historically concentrated in southern Illinois.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 29
Figure 4-7. Notable Earthquakes in Illinois with Geologic and Earthquake Epicenters in Franklin County
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 30
Geographic Location for Earthquake Hazard Franklin County is situated in a region susceptible to earthquakes. Since 1974, the epicenters of ten small
earthquakes (M1.7-M3.1) have been recorded in Franklin County (see Figure 4-7(C)). This local seismic
activity has been focused along the Rend Lake Fault System. The Cottage Grove Fault System is a right-
lateral, strike-slip fault that extends 113 km across southern Illinois. The seismogenic potential of these
structures is unknown, and the geologic mechanism related to the minor earthquakes is poorly
understood.
The two most significant zones of seismic activity in Illinois are the New Madrid Seismic Zone and the
Wabash Valley Fault System. Return periods for large earthquakes within the New Madrid System are
estimated to be ~500–1000 years; moderate quakes between magnitude 5.5 and 6.0 can recur within
approximately 150 years or less. The Wabash Valley Fault System extends nearly the entire length of
southern Illinois and has the potential to generate an earthquake of sufficient strength to cause damage
between St. Louis, MO and Indianapolis, IN. While large earthquakes (>M7.0) experienced during the New
Madrid Events of 1811 and 1812 are unlikely in Franklin County, moderate earthquakes (≤ 6.0M) in or in
the vicinity of Franklin County are probable. The USGS estimates the probability of a moderate M5.5
earthquake occurring in Franklin County within the next 500-years at approximately 25-40% (see Figure
4-8).
Figure 4-8. Probability of M5.5 Earthquake occurring in Franklin County within the next 500 years
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 31
Hazard Extent for Earthquake Hazard Earthquake effects are possible anywhere in Franklin County. One of the most critical sources of information that is required for accurate assessment of earthquake risk is soils data. The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) compliant soils map was provided by FEMA for the analysis. This map identifies the soils most susceptible to failure.
Risk Identification for Earthquake Hazard Based on historical information and current USGS and SIU research and studies, future earthquakes in
Franklin County are possible, but large (>M7.0) earthquakes that cause catastrophic damage are unlikely.
According to the Franklin County Planning Team’s assessment, earthquakes are ranked as the number
two hazard.
Vulnerability Analysis for Earthquake Hazard Earthquakes could impact the entire county equally; therefore, the entire county’s population and all
buildings are vulnerable to an earthquake. To accommodate this risk, this plan considers all buildings
located within the county as vulnerable. Tables 4-7 and 4-8 display the existing buildings and critical
infrastructure in Franklin County.
Critical Facilities All critical facilities are vulnerable to earthquakes. Critical facilities are susceptible to many of the same
impacts as any other building within the jurisdiction. These impacts include structural failure and loss of
facility functionality (e.g., a damaged police station will no longer be able to serve the community). Table
4-7 lists the types and number of critical facilities for the entire county and Appendix F displays a large
format map of the locations of all critical facilities within the county.
Building Inventory Table 4-8 lists the building exposure in terms of types and numbers of buildings for the entire county. The
buildings within the county can expect similar impacts to those discussed for critical facilities. These
impacts include structural failure and loss of building function which could result in indirect impacts (e.g.,
damaged homes will no longer be habitable causing residents to seek shelter).
Infrastructure During an earthquake, the types of infrastructure that shaking could impact include roadways, utility
lines/pipes, railroads, and bridges. Since an extensive inventory of the infrastructure was not available
for use in the earthquake models, it is important to emphasize that any number of these items could
become damaged in the event of an earthquake. The impacts to these items include broken, failed, or
impassable roadways, broken or failed utility lines (e.g., loss of power or gas to community), and railway
failure from broken or impassable railways. Bridges could also fail or become impassable, causing risk to
motorists.
Risk Priority Index
Probability x Magnitude = RPI 2 x 7 = 14
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 32
Hazus-MH Earthquake Analyses Existing geological information was reviewed prior to the Planning Team selection of earthquake
scenarios. A Magnitude 5.5 arbitrary earthquake scenario was performed to provide a reasonable basis
for earthquake planning in Franklin County. The other two scenarios included a Magnitude of 7.7 with
the epicenter located on the New Madrid Fault Zone and a Magnitude 7.1 with the epicenter located on
the Wabash Fault Zone.
The earthquake-loss analysis for the probabilistic scenario was based on ground-shaking parameters
derived from U.S. Geological Survey probabilistic seismic hazard curves for the earthquake with the 500-
year return period. This scenario evaluates the average impacts of a multitude of possible earthquake
epicenters with a magnitude typical of that expected for a 500-year return period. The New Madrid Fault
Zone runs along the Mississippi River through Arkansas, Tennessee, Missouri, Kentucky and Southern
Illinois. The Wabash Valley Fault Zone runs through Southeastern Illinois, Western Kentucky and
Southwest Indiana. This represents a realistic scenario for planning purposes.
The earthquake hazard modeling scenarios performed:
Magnitude 5.5 arbitrary earthquake epicenter in Franklin County
Magnitude 7.7 event along the New Madrid Fault Zone
Magnitude 7.1 event along the Wabash Valley Fault Zone
This report presents two types of building losses: direct building losses and business interruption losses.
The direct building losses are the estimated costs to repair or replace the damage caused to the building
and its contents. The business interruption losses are the losses associated with inability to operate a
business because of the damage sustained during the earthquake. Business interruption losses also
include the temporary living expenses for those people displaced from their homes because of the
earthquake.
Results for M5.5 Earthquake Scenario The results of the M5.5 arbitrary earthquake scenario are depicted in Tables 4-18, 4-19, and Figure 4-9.
Hazus-MH estimates that approximately 2,293 buildings will be at least moderately damaged. This is over
10% of the total number of buildings in the Franklin County. It is estimated that 45 buildings would be
damaged beyond repair.
The building related losses are approximately $100 million dollars. It is estimated that 21% of the losses
are related to the business interruption of the region. By far, the largest loss is sustained by the residential
occupancies which make up over 60% of the total loss.
Table 4-18. M5.5 Earthquake Damage Estimates by Building Occupancy
None Slight Moderate Extensive Complete
Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%)
Agriculture 76 0.49 24 0.59 20 1.04 6 1.57 1 1.2
Commercial 547 3.52 188 4.49 125 6.63 32 8.96 3 7.83
Educational 20 0.13 6 0.14 4 0.22 1 0.25 0 0.32
Government 30 0.19 9 0.21 6 0.31 1 0.32 0 0.42
Industrial 135 0.87 45 1.09 34 1.82 9 2.61 1 2.03
Other Residential 3,958 25.47 1,183 28.32 673 35.65 128 35.29 12 26.58
Religion 80 0.52 23 0.56 15 0.8 4 1.11 1 1.13
Single Family 10,695 68.82 2,700 64.61 1,010 53.54 180 49.89 27 60.48
Total: 15,541 4,178 1,887 361 45
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 33
Table 4-19. M5.5 Earthquake Estimates of Building Economic Losses (in Millions of Dollars)
Category Area Single Family
Other Residential Commercial Industrial Other Total
Income Losses
Wage $0.00 $0.18 $3.36 $0.22 $0.31 $4.07
Capital-Related $0.00 $0.08 $2.69 $0.14 $0.08 $2.99
Rental $1.41 $0.69 $1.54 $0.08 $0.14 $3.86
Relocation $5.24 $1.02 $2.55 $0.31 $1.22 $10.34
Subtotal: $6.65 $1.97 $10.14 $0.75 $1.75 $21.26
Capital Stock Losses
Structural $6.96 $1.46 $2.64 $0.84 $1.33 $13.23
Non-Structural $26.07 $5.92 $7.64 $2.46 $3.52 $45.61
Content $9.46 $1.52 $4.27 $1.71 $2.02 $18.98
Inventory $0.00 $0.00 $0.13 $0.44 $0.04 $0.61
Subtotal: $42.49 $8.90 $14.68 $5.45 $6.91 $78.43
Total: $49.14 $10.87 $24.82 $6.20 $8.66 $99.69
Figure 4-9. Franklin County M5.5 Earthquake Building Economic Losses
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 34
Results for M7.7 New Madrid Earthquake The results of the M7.7 New Madrid earthquake scenario are depicted in Tables 4-20, 4-21, and Figure 4-
10. Hazus-MH estimates that approximately 638 buildings will be at least moderately damaged. This is
over 3% of the total number of buildings in the Franklin County. It is estimated that 0 buildings would be
damaged beyond repair.
The building related losses are approximately $55 million dollars. It is estimated that 10% of the losses are
related to the business interruption of the region. By far, the largest loss is sustained by the residential
occupancies which make up over 58% of the total loss.
Table 4-20. New Madrid M7.7 Earthquake Damage Estimates by Building Occupancy
None Slight Moderate Extensive Complete
Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%)
Agriculture 89 0.49 27 0.83 10 1.6 1 2.89 0 1.6
Commercial 657 3.61 179 5.61 56 8.98 3 15.94 0 9.96
Educational 24 0.13 6 0.18 1 0.23 0 0.23 0 0.31
Government 36 0.2 8 0.25 2 0.33 0 0.33 0 0.33
Industrial 161 0.89 46 1.45 17 2.71 1 5.07 0 2.69
Other Residential 4,496 24.74 1,130 35.34 319 51.43 7 40.93 0 18.61
Religion 95 0.52 22 0.69 6 0.99 0 1.54 0 1.38
Single Family 12,617 69.42 1,779 55.64 209 33.73 6 33.07 0 65.12
Total: 18,175 3,197 620 18 0
Table 4-21. New Madrid M7.7 Earthquake Estimates of Building Economic Losses (in Millions of Dollars)
Category Area Single Family
Other Residential Commercial Industrial Other Total
Income Losses
Wage $0.00 $0.02 $0.99 $0.08 $0.11 $1.20
Capital-Related $0.00 $0.01 $0.81 $0.05 $0.03 $0.90
Rental $0.23 $0.16 $0.54 $0.03 $0.03 $0.99
Relocation $0.75 $0.37 $0.75 $0.11 $0.27 $2.25
Subtotal: $0.98 $0.56 $3.09 $0.27 $0.44 $5.34
Capital Stock Losses
Structural $1.57 $0.54 $0.78 $0.29 $0.35 $3.53
Non-Structural $14.36 $3.86 $5.29 $2.09 $2.34 $27.94
Content $9.09 $1.46 $4.05 $1.60 $1.92 $18.12
Inventory $0.00 $0.00 $0.12 $0.41 $0.04 $0.57
Subtotal: $25.02 $5.86 $10.24 $4.39 $4.65 $50.16
Total: $26.00 $6.42 $13.33 $4.66 $5.09 $55.50
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 35
Figure 4-10. New Madrid M7.7 Earthquake Building Economic Losses
Results M7.1 Magnitude Wabash Valley Earthquake – General Building Stock The results of the Wabash Valley M7.1 earthquake scenario are depicted in Tables 4-22, 4-23, and Figure
4-11. Hazus-MH estimates that approximately 4 buildings will be at least moderately damaged. Zero
buildings would be damaged beyond repair.
The building related losses are approximately $6 million dollars. It is estimated that 1% of the losses are
related to the business interruption of the region. By far, the largest loss is sustained by the residential
occupancies which make up over 55% of the total loss.
Table 4-22. Wabash Valley 7.1 Magnitude Earthquake Damage Estimates by Building Occupancy
None Slight Moderate Extensive Complete
Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%) Count (%)
Agriculture 125 0.57 1 0.82 0 1.35 0 0.00 0 0.00
Commercial 890 4.06 5 5.30 0 8.23 0 0.00 0 0.00
Educational 31 0.14 0 0.19 0 0.23 0 0.00 0 0.00
Government 46 0.21 0 0.22 0 0.26 0 0.00 0 0.00
Industrial 224 1.02 1 1.36 0 2.29 0 0.00 0 0.00
Other Residential 5,916 26.99 35 41.18 2 40.53 0 0.00 0 0.00
Religion 122 0.56 1 0.79 0 1.07 0 0.00 0 0.00
Single Family 14,567 66.45 43 50.15 2 46.03 0 0.00 0 0.00
Total: 21,921 86 4 0 0
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 36
Table 4-23. Wabash 7.1 Magnitude Earthquake Estimates of Building Economic Losses (in Millions of Dollars)
Category Area Single Family
Other Residential Commercial Industrial Other Total
Income Losses
Wage $0.00 $0.00 $0.01 $0.00 $0.00 $0.01
Capital-Related $0.00 $0.00 $0.01 $0.00 $0.00 $0.01
Rental $0.00 $0.00 $0.01 $0.00 $0.00 $0.01
Relocation $0.01 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.01
Subtotal: $0.01 $0.00 $0.03 $0.00 $0.00 $0.04
Capital Stock Losses
Structural $0.03 $0.01 $0.01 $0.00 $0.00 $0.05
Non-Structural $1.74 $0.47 $0.83 $0.04 $0.34 $3.42
Content $1.26 $0.22 $0.70 $0.30 $0.31 $2.79
Inventory $0.00 $0.00 $0.02 $0.08 $0.01 $0.11
Subtotal: $3.03 $0.70 $1.56 $0.42 $0.66 $6.37
Total: $3.04 $0.70 $1.59 $0.42 $0.66 $6.41
Figure 4-11. Wabash Valley M7.1 Scenario Building Economic Losses
Vulnerability to Future Assets/Infrastructure for Earthquake Hazard New construction, especially critical facilities, should accommodate earthquake mitigation design
standards.
Suggestions for Community Development Trends Community development should occur outside of the low-lying areas in floodplains with a water table
within five feet of grade that is susceptible to liquefaction. It is important to harden and protect future
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 37
and existing structures against the possible termination of public services and systems including power
lines, water and sanitary lines, and public communication.
4.3.4 Hazardous Material Storage and Transportation Hazard
Hazard Definition Illinois has numerous active transportation lines that run through many of its counties. Active railways
transport harmful and volatile substances across county and state lines every day. Transporting chemicals
and substances along interstate routes is commonplace in Illinois. The rural areas of Illinois have
considerable agricultural commerce, meaning transportation of fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides is
common on rural roads. These factors increase the chance of hazardous material releases and spills
throughout the state of Illinois.
The release or spill of certain substances can cause an explosion. Explosions result from the ignition of
volatile products such as petroleum products, natural and other flammable gases, hazardous
materials/chemicals, dust, and bombs. An explosion can potentially cause death, injury, and property
damage. In addition, a fire routinely follows an explosion, which may cause further damage and inhibit
emergency response. Emergency response may require fire, safety/law enforcement, search and rescue,
and hazardous materials units.
Previous Occurrences of Hazardous Materials Storage and Transportation Hazard Franklin County has not experienced a significantly large-scale hazardous material incident at a fixed site
or during transport resulting in multiple deaths or serious injuries.
The Illinois Emergency Management Agency maintains a comprehensive Hazardous Materials Incident
Report Database for the State of Illinois. The database contains information on all Hazardous Materials
Reports since 1987 but does not include an assessment of economic and property losses in terms of dollars
of damage. The database reported 312 incidents in Franklin County as of February 2015. The most recent
event occurred in August 2014 following an incident on Interstate 57 between mileposts 75 and 76 near
Benton. Road debris struck the tank and released 50 gallons of diesel fuel. Additional details of individual
hazard events are on the IEMA website.
Industries regulated by The U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA) are required to report incidents which meet or exceed established reporting
criteria. The data for reported incidents are available on the PHMSA website via the U.S. Department of
Transportation Hazmat Intelligence Portal. The database reported 29 incidents in Franklin County as of
February 2015. Table 4-24 identifies PHMSA reported incidents that caused damage, death, or injury in
Franklin County. Additional details of individual hazard events are on the PHMSA website.
The most damaging event occurred in 2010 following a traffic accident on Interstate 57 at milepost 65
near West Frankfort. 40,669 solid pounds of scrap battery parts were released. The total damage including
cost of materials lost, carrier damage, property damage, response costs, and remediation cleanup costs
totaled $166,000. However, these estimates are often preliminary in nature and may not match the final
assessment of economic and property losses.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 38
Table 4-24. Selected PHMSA-Recorded Hazardous Material Incidents that Caused Damage, Death, or Injury
Location Date Mode of
Transportation Hazardous Material Class Death Injuries Damages*
West Frankfort
7/15/2010 Highway Miscellaneous Hazardous
Material (Batteries) 0 0 $166,000
Sesser 11/15/1989 Highway Combustible Liquid 0 0 $100
West Frankfort
7/2/1998 Highway Poisonous Materials
0 0 $375
Totals: 0 0 $166,475
Source: U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration * Damages includes the cost of the material lost, carrier damage, property damage, response costs, and remediation cleanup costs.
Geographic Location of Hazardous Materials Storage and Transportation Hazard Hazardous material hazards are countywide and are primarily associated with the transport of materials
via highway, railroad, and/or river barge. Major hazardous material facilities in the county include the FS
plants in Macedonia and Christopher with 56 Tier II reporting facilities.
Hazard Extent of Hazardous Materials Storage and Transportation Hazard The extent of the hazardous material hazard varies both in terms of the quantity of material being
transported as well as the specific content of the container.
Risk Identification of Hazardous Materials Storage and Transportation Hazard Based on input from the Planning Team, future occurrence of hazardous materials accident in Franklin
County is likely. According to the Risk Priority Index (RPI) and County input, hazardous materials storage
and transportation hazard is ranked as the number three hazard.
Vulnerability Analysis for Hazardous Materials Storage and Transportation Hazard The entire county is vulnerable to a hazardous material release and can expect impacts within the affected
area. The main concern during a release or spill is the affected population. This plan will therefore
consider all buildings located within the county as vulnerable. To accommodate this risk, this plan
considers all buildings located within the county as vulnerable. Tables 4-7 and 4-8 display the existing
buildings and critical infrastructure in Franklin County.
Critical Facilities All critical facilities and communities within the county are at risk. A critical facility will encounter many
of the same impacts as any other building within the jurisdiction. These impacts include structural failure
due to fire or explosion and loss of function of the facility (e.g., a damaged police station can no longer
serve the community). Table 4-7 lists the types and number of critical facilities for the entire county and
Appendix F displays a large format map of the locations of all critical facilities within the county.
Building Inventory
Risk Priority Index
Probability x Magnitude = RPI 3 x 3 = 9
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 39
Table 4-8 lists the building exposure in terms of types and numbers of buildings for the entire county. The
buildings within the county can expect similar impacts to those discussed for critical facilities. These
impacts include structural failure due to fire or explosion or debris, and loss of function of the building
(e.g., a person cannot inhabit a damaged home, causing residents to seek shelter).
Infrastructure During a hazardous material release, the types of potentially impacted infrastructure include roadways,
utility lines/pipes, railroads, and bridges. Since an extensive inventory of the infrastructure is not available
to this plan, it is important to emphasize that a hazardous materials release could damage any number of
these items. The impacts to these items include: broken, failed, or impassable roadways; broken or failed
utility lines (e.g., loss of power or gas to community); and railway failure from broken or impassable
railways. Bridges could become impassable causing risk to motorists.
ALOHA Hazardous Chemical Release Analysis The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s ALOHA (Areal Locations of Hazardous Atmospheres) model
was used to assess the impacted area for vinyl chloride release at intersection of Route 34 and the
Missouri Pacific Railroad in Benton. The Franklin County Planning Team selected the vinyl chloride
scenario because of significant truck and train traffic along major transportation routes within a relatively
densely populated area.
ALOHA is a computer program designed for response to chemical accidents, as well as emergency planning
and training. Ammonia, chlorine, vinyl chloride and propane are common chemicals used in industrial
operations and are found in either liquid or gas form. Rail and truck tankers haul ammonia, chlorine, vinyl
chloride and propane to and from facilities.
Vinyl chloride is a colorless gas with a sweet odor. Easily ignited. Shipped as a liquefied gas under own
vapor pressure. Contact with the unconfined liquid may cause frostbite by evaporative cooling. Leaks may
be liquid or vapor. Vapors are heavier than air. May asphyxiate by the displacement of air. Under
prolonged exposure to fire or intense heat the containers may rupture violently and rocket. Suspected
carcinogen. Used to make plastics, adhesives, and other chemicals.
For the vinyl chloride scenario, SIU assumed average atmospheric and climatic conditions for the fall
season with a breeze from the east. SIU considered the seasonal conditions upon the request of the
Planning Team and obtained average monthly conditions for Paducah, KY from NOAA’s Monthly Weather
Summary. Figures 4-12 depicts the plume origin of the modeled hazardous chemical release in Franklin
County. The ALOHA atmospheric modeling parameters for the vinyl chloride release, depicted in Figure 4-
13, were based upon a northeasterly speed of 10 miles per hour. The temperature was 50°F with 75%
humidity and a cloud cover of five-tenths skies. SIU used average weather conditions for the month of
June reported from NOAA for wind direction, wind speed, and temperature to simulate fall conditions.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 40
Figure 4-12. ALOHA Modeled Hazardous Chemical Plume Origin in Franklin County
The source of the chemical spill is a horizontal, cylindrical-shaped tank. The diameter of the tank was set
to 8 feet and the length set to 33 feet (12,408 gallons). At the time of its release, it was estimated that
the tank was 75% full. The vinyl chloride in this tank is in its liquid state. This release was based on a leak
from a 2.5-inch-diameter hole, 12 inches above the bottom of the tank. According to these ALOHA
parameters, this scenario would release approximately 4,360 pounds of material per minute. Figure 4-13
shows the plume modeling parameters in greater detail.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 41
Figure 4-13. ALOHA Modeling Parameters for Vinyl Chloride Release
Using the parameters in Figure 4-13, approximately 71,237 pounds of material would be realized. The
image in Figure 4-14 depicts the plume footprint generated by ALOHA. As the substance moves away from
the source, the level of substance concentration decreases. Each color-coded area depicts a level of
concentration measured in parts per million.
Figure 4-14. ALOHA Generate Plume Footprint of Vinyl Chloride Scenario
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 42
The red buffer (20 ppm) extends no more than 250 yards from the point of release after one hour. The
orange buffer (2 ppm) extends no more than 500 yards and the yellow buffer (0.5 ppm) extends no more
than 1,400 yards from the point of release. The dashed line depicts the level of confidence within the
confines of the entire plume footprint. The ALOHA model is 95% confident that the release will stay within
this boundary.
Acute Exposure Guideline Levels (AEGL) are intended to describe the risk to humans resulting from once-
in-a-lifetime, or rare exposure to airborne chemical (U.S. EPA AEGL Program). The National Advisory
Committee for the Development of Acute Exposure Guideline Levels for Hazardous Substances (AEGL
Committee) is involved in developing these guidelines to help both national and local authorities, as well
as private companies, deal with emergencies involving spills, or other catastrophic exposures. AEGLs
represent threshold exposure limits for the general public and are applicable to emergency exposure
periods ranging from 10 minutes to 8 hours. The three AEGLs have been defined as follows:
AEGL-1: the airborne concentration, expressed as parts per million or milligrams per cubic meter (ppm or mg/m3) of a substance above which it is predicted that the general population, including susceptible individuals, could experience notable discomfort, irritation, or certain asymptomatic nonsensory effects. However, the effects are not disabling and are transient and reversible upon cessation of exposure. AEGL-2: the airborne concentration (expressed as ppm or mg/m3) of a substance above which it is predicted that the general population, including susceptible individuals, could experience irreversible or other serious, long-lasting adverse health effects or an impaired ability to escape. AEGL-3: the airborne concentration (expressed as ppm or mg/m3) of a substance above which it is predicted that the general population, including susceptible individuals, could experience life-threatening health effects or death.
Airborne concentrations below the AEGL-1 represent exposure levels that can produce mild and
progressively increasing but transient and non-disabling odor, taste, and sensory irritation or certain
asymptomatic, non-sensory effects. With increasing airborne concentrations above each AEGL, there is a
progressive increase in the likelihood of occurrence and the severity of effects described for each
corresponding AEGL. Although the AEGL values represent threshold levels for the general public, including
susceptible subpopulations, such as infants, children, the elderly, persons with asthma, and those with
other illnesses, it is recognized that individuals, subject to unique or idiosyncratic responses, could
experience the effects described at concentrations below the corresponding AEGL.
Results for Vinyl Chloride Release An estimate of property exposed to the vinyl chloride spill was calculated by using the building inventory
and intersecting these data with each of the AEGL levels (AEGL 3: ≥ 4800 ppm, AEGL 2: ≥ 1200 ppm and
AEGL 1: ≥ 250 ppm). The Franklin County assessment and parcel data was utilized for this analysis. There
are 150 building within the vinyl chloride plume. It should be noted that the results should be interpreted
as potential degrees of loss rather than exact number of buildings damaged to the vinyl chloride release.
Table 4-25 lists the total amount of building exposure to each AEGL zone. Figure 4-15 depicts the vinyl
chloride spill footprint and location of the buildings exposed. The GIS overlay analysis estimates that the
full replacement cost of the buildings exposed to the vinyl chloride plume is approximately $303 million.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 43
Table 4-25. Estimated Building Exposure as a Result of the Vinyl Chloride Release
Occupancy
Building Exposure Number of Buildings
AEGL 1 AEGL 2 AEGL 3 AEGL 1 AEGL 2 AEGL3
Residential $2,635,718 $388,845 $34,853 43 5 1
Commercial $467,000,820 $276,785,520 $164,075,010 57 37 7
Total: $469,636,538 $277,174,365 $164,109,863 100 42 8
Figure 4-15. ALOHA Plume Footprint and Buildings Exposed to Vinyl Chloride Release
Essential Facilities Damage There are four essential facilities within the limits of the vinyl chloride scenario. Table 4-26 and Figure 4-
16 identifies the affected facilities.
Table 4-26. Essential Facilities within the Vinyl Chloride Plume Footprint
Essential Facility Facility Name
Fire Department Benton Fire Dept.
Police Department Benton Police Dept.
EOC Franklin County Jail
Schools Franklin County ROE 21
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 44
Figure 4-16. Map of Essential Facilities within the Vinyl Chloride Plume Footprint
Vulnerability to Future Assets/Infrastructure for Hazardous Materials Storage and
Transportation Hazard Franklin County is expect to see future economic expansion within the city limits of Benton and West
Frankfort. These areas are particularly vulnerable to chemical releases because of transportation of
hazardous materials along railways, U.S. Highway 51 and Interstate 57.
Suggestion for Community Development Trends Because the hazardous material hazard events may occur anywhere within the county, future
development is susceptible to the hazard. The major transportation routes and the industries located in
Franklin County pose a threat of dangerous chemicals and hazardous materials release. Regional
particularly vulnerable are within the city limits of Benton and West Frankfort within close proximity to
transportation corridors such as Interstate 57.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 45
4.3.5 Thunderstorm Hazard
Hazard Definition Severe thunderstorms are weather events with one or more of the following characteristics: strong winds,
large and damaging hail, and frequent lightning. Severe thunderstorms most frequently occur in Illinois
during the spring and summer months, but can occur at any time. A severe thunderstorm’s impacts can
be localized or can be widespread in nature. A thunderstorm is classified as severe when it meets one or
more of the following criteria:
Hail 0.75 inches or greater in diameter Hail is a possible product of a strong thunderstorm. Hail usually falls near the center of a storm, but strong winds occurring at high altitudes in the thunderstorm can blow the hailstones away from the storm center, resulting in damage in other areas near the storm. Hailstones range from pea-sized to baseball-sized, and some reports note hailstones larger than softballs.
Frequent and dangerous lightning Lightning is a discharge of electricity from a thunderstorm. Lightning is often perceived as a minor hazard, but lightning damages many structures and kills or severely injures numerous people in the United States each year.
Wind speeds greater than or equal to 58 miles per hour Straight-line winds from thunderstorms are fairly common in Illinois. Straight-line winds can cause damage to homes, businesses, power lines, and agricultural areas, and may require temporary sheltering of individuals who are without power for extended periods of time.
Previous Occurrences of Thunderstorm Hazards The National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) database reported eighty-three hailstorms in Franklin County
since 1950. Hailstorms occur nearly every year in the late spring and early summer months. The most
recent reported occurrence was in April of 2014, when storms formed near a warm front that was draped
across southeast Missouri, Southern Illinois, and Kentucky. The storms occurred within a moist and
moderately unstable air mass along and behind the warm front. The strong moisture feed contributed to
torrential downpours that produced flash flooding in a number of counties. Hail was reported in Sesser.
Table 4-27 lists the significant hail storms (such as those that cause death, damage or injury) in Franklin
County.
Table 4-27. Selected NCDC-Recorded Hail that Caused Damage, Death, or Injury in Franklin County Location or County* Date Deaths Injuries Property Damage
Franklin County 5/31/1998 0 0 $25,000
Rend Lake 4/21/2002 0 0 $100,000
Whittington 6/27/2002 0 0 $2,000
Total: 0 0 $127,000
*NCDC records are estimates of damage compiled by the National Weather Service from various local, state, and federal sources. However, these estimates are often preliminary in nature and may not match the final assessment of economic and property losses related to a given weather event.
The NCDC database reported two lightning events in Franklin County. The most recent reported event
was in July 2012 in West Frankfort when lightning struck a tree and a house. The house caught fire,
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 46
resulting in damage to the roof. Table 4-28 identifies NCDC-recorded lightning that caused damage, death,
or injury in Franklin County.
Table 4-28. Selected NCDC-Recorded Lightning that Caused Damage, Death, or Injury in Franklin County Location or County* Date Deaths Injuries Property Damage
Christopher 10/26/2010 0 0 $10,000
West Frankfort 7/3/2012 0 0 $9,000
Total: 0 0 $19,000
*NCDC records are estimates of damage compiled by the National Weather Service from various local, state, and federal sources. However, these estimates are often preliminary in nature and may not match the final assessment of economic and property losses related to a given weather event.
The NCDC database reported 166 severe thunder and wind storms in Franklin County. Table 4-29 identifies
selected NCDC-recorded wind storms that caused major damage (over $100,000), death, or injury in
Franklin County.
Table 4-29. Selected NCDC-Recorded Thunder and Wind Storms that Caused Major Damage (over $100,000), Death, or Injury in Franklin County
Location or County* Date Deaths Injuries Property Damage
Franklin County 8/10/2006 0 0 $100,000
Franklin County 4/2/2006 0 0 $150,000
Franklin County 4/19/2011 0 0 $200,000
Franklin County 7/1/2012 0 0 $200,000
Franklin County 9/14/2008 0 0 $200,000
Sesser 4/27/2002 0 0 $250,000
Franklin County 6/21/2011 1 0 $250,000
Franklin County 6/19/2011 0 0 $380,000
Zeigler 4/19/1996 0 0 $500,000
Franklin County 5/8/2009 0 0 $6,000,000
Total: 1 0 $8,230,000
*NCDC records are estimates of damage compiled by the National Weather Service from various local, state, and federal sources. However, these estimates are often preliminary in nature and may not match the final assessment of economic and property losses related to a given weather event.
The most damaging wind event in southern Illinois was the May 2009 Derecho. According to NOAA, the
2009 “Super Derecho” was one of the most intense and unusual derechos ever observed. The storm
produced significant and often continuous damage over a broad swath from the high plans of western
Kansas to the foothills of the Appalachians in eastern Kentucky. Figure 4-17 depicts the area affected by
the Super Derecho with wind damage or wind gusts ≥ 50 kts (58 mph), open blue circles; estimated or
measured wind gusts ≥ 65 kts (74 mph), filled blue circles; hail ≥ 0.75 inches, open green circles; hail ≥ 2.0
inches, filled green circles; tornadoes, red triangles. Flash flooding (by county) denoted by black squares.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 47
Figure 4-17. Area affected by and severe weather reports associated with the May 8, 2009 "Super Derecho" convective system
During the May 2009 Derecho, widespread damaging winds across southern Franklin County caused lots
of power outages. At the peak of the outages, 49 percent of the county was without power. Among the
hardest hit cities was West Frankfort. Peak winds were estimated around 60 mph at Benton, but from 80
to 90 mph around West Frankfort and near the Williamson County line. Thirteen homes were destroyed
beyond repair. Damage assessments indicated 184 dwellings sustained damage countywide. Of that
number, 114 sustained minor damage, and 70 needed moderate repairs. Numerous trees were blown
down, blocking some of the main roads. Near the Williamson County line, trees were blown across the
southbound lanes of Interstate 57. Secondary roads stayed blocked for longer periods of time. The hardest
hit areas were in and near Royalton, Zeigler, Orient, West Frankfort, and Thompsonville. In Christopher,
sheds and carports were overturned, and trees were down on roads and power lines. An uprooted tree
landed on a house. The community park in West Frankfort was closed for a little over a week due to
downed trees and fences. Some schools were closed for part of the week following the storm.
Geographic Location of Thunderstorm Hazard The entire county has the same risk for occurrence of thunderstorms. They can occur at any location
within the county.
Hazard Extent for Thunderstorm Hazard The extent of the hypothetical thunderstorms depends upon the extent of the storm, the wind speed, and
the size of hail stones. Thunderstorms can occur at any location within the county.
Risk Identification for Thunderstorm Hazard Based on historical information, the occurrence of future high winds, hail, and lightning is highly likely.
The County should expect high winds, hail, and lightning of widely varying magnitudes in the future.
According to the Franklin County Planning Team’s assessment, severe thunderstorms are ranked as the
number four hazard.
Risk Priority Index
Probability x Magnitude = RPI 3 x 2 = 6
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 48
Vulnerability Analysis for Thunderstorm Hazard The entire county’s population and all buildings are vulnerable to a severe thunderstorm and can expect
the same impacts within the affected area. To accommodate this risk, this plan considers all buildings
located within the county as vulnerable. Tables 4-7 and 4-8 display the existing buildings and critical
infrastructure in Franklin County.
Critical Facilities All critical facilities are vulnerable to severe thunderstorms. A critical facility will encounter many of the
same impacts as any other building within the jurisdiction. These impacts include structural failure,
damaging debris (trees or limbs), roofs blown off or windows broken by hail or high winds, fires caused
by lightning, and loss of building functionality (e.g., a damaged police station cannot serve the
community). Table 4-7 lists the types and number of critical facilities for the entire county and Appendix
F displays a large format map of the locations of all critical facilities within the county.
Building Inventory Table 4-8 lists the building exposure in terms of types and numbers of buildings for the entire county. The
buildings within the county can expect impacts similar to those discussed for critical facilities. These
impacts include structural failure, damaging debris (trees or limbs), roofs blown off or windows broken by
hail or high winds, fires caused by lightning, and loss of building functionality (e.g., a person cannot inhabit
a damaged home, causing residents to seek shelter).
Infrastructure A severe thunderstorm could impact roadways, utility lines/pipes, railroads, and bridges. Since the
county’s entire infrastructure is vulnerable, it is important to emphasize that a severe thunderstorm could
damage any number of these structures. The impacts to these structures include broken, failed, or
impassable roadways; broken or failed utility lines (e.g., loss of power or gas to community); or impassable
railways. Bridges could become impassable causing risk to motorists.
Potential Dollar Losses from Thunderstorm Hazard According to the NDCD, Franklin County has incurred approximately $9 million in damages relating to
thunderstorms, including hail, lightning, and high winds since 1950. NCDC records are estimates of
damage compiled by the National Weather Service from various local, state, and federal sources.
However, these estimates are often preliminary in nature and may not match the final assessment of
economic and property losses related to a given weather event. As a result, the potential dollar losses for
a future event cannot be reliably constrained; however, based on average property damage in the past
decade, SIU estimates that Franklin County incurs property damages of approximately $140,000 per year
related to severe thunderstorms.
Vulnerability to Future Assets/Infrastructure for Thunderstorm Hazard All future development within the county and all communities will remain vulnerable to severe
thunderstorm events.
Suggestions for Community Development Trends Local officials should enhance severe storm preparedness if they sponsor a wide range of programs and
initiatives to address the overall safety of county residents. It is suggested that the county should build
new structures with more sturdy construction, and harden existing structures to lessen the potential
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 49
impacts of severe weather. This is particularly import where the future economic expansion is expected
to take place within the city limits of Benton and West Frankfort. Additional warning sirens can warn the
community of approaching storms to ensure the safety of Franklin County residents and minimizing
property damage.
4.3.6 Flooding Hazard
Hazard Definition for Flooding Flooding is a significant natural hazard throughout the United States. The type, magnitude, and severity
of flooding are functions of the magnitude and distribution of precipitation over a given area, the rate at
which precipitation infiltrates the ground, the geometry and hydrology of the catchment, and flow
dynamics and conditions in and along the river channel. Floods are classified as one of two types in this
plan: upstream floods or downstream floods. Both types of floods are common in Illinois.
Upstream floods, also called flash floods, occur in the upper parts of drainage basins and are generally
characterized by periods of intense rainfall over a short duration. These floods arise with very little
warning and often result in locally intense damage, and sometimes loss of life, due to the high energy of
the flowing water. Flood waters can snap trees, topple buildings, and easily move large boulders or other
structures. Six inches of rushing water can upend a person; another 18 inches might carry off a car.
Generally, upstream floods cause severe damage over relatively localized areas. Urban flooding is a type
of upstream flood. Urban flooding involves the overflow of storm drain systems and can result from
inadequate drainage combined with heavy rainfall or rapid snowmelt. Upstream or flash floods can occur
at any time of the year in Illinois, but they are most common in the spring and summer months.
Downstream floods, sometimes called riverine floods, refer to floods on large rivers at locations with large
upstream catchments. Downstream floods are typically associated with precipitation events that are of
relatively long duration and occur over large areas. Flooding on small tributary streams may be limited,
but the contribution of increased runoff may result in a large flood downstream. The lag time between
precipitation and time of the flood peak is much longer for downstream floods than for upstream floods,
generally providing ample warning for people to move to safe locations and, to some extent, secure some
property against damage. Riverine flooding on the large rivers of Illinois generally occurs during either
the spring or summer.
Previous Occurrences of Flooding The NCDC database reported 74 flooding events in Franklin County. The most recent recorded event was
in April 2014 when heavy rainfall during the first week of April caused most of the region's rivers to rise.
Many rivers experienced minor to moderate flooding. Minor flooding occurred along the Big Muddy River
near Zeigler. Low-lying woods and fields near the river were inundated. Table 4-30 identifies NCDC-
recorded flooding events that caused damage, death, or injury in Franklin County.
Table 4-30. NCDC-recorded Flooding Events that caused Death, Damage or Injury in Franklin County Location or County* Date Deaths Injuries Property Damage
West Frankfort 5/10/1996 0 0 $8,000,000
Franklin County 4/22/1996 0 0 $5,000
West Frankfort 4/28/1996 0 0 $3,000,000
West Frankfort 6/29/1998 0 0 $10,000
Franklin County 4/15/1998 0 0 $10,000
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 50
Location or County* Date Deaths Injuries Property Damage
Franklin County 2/1/1999 0 0 $3,000
Franklin County 1/21/1999 0 0 $100,000
Franklin County 5/1/2002 0 0 $3,000
Franklin County 6/27/2002 0 0 $75,000
Franklin County 3/18/2008 0 0 $1,500,000
Franklin County 5/8/2009 0 0 $10,000
Franklin County 5/1/2011 1 0 $80,000
Franklin County 12/1/2011 0 0 $1,000
Total: 1 0 $12,797,000
*NCDC records are estimates of damage compiled by the National Weather Service from various local, state, and federal sources. However, these estimates are often preliminary in nature and may not match the final assessment of economic and property losses related to a given weather event.
There has been several structures in Franklin County that has experienced repetitive losses due to flooding. FEMA defines a repetitive loss structure as a structure covered by a contract of flood insurance issued under the NFIP that has suffered flood loss damage on two or more occasions during a 10-year period that ends on the date of the second loss, in which the cost to repair the flood damage is ≥ 25% of the market value of the structure at the time of each flood loss. The Illinois Emergency Management Agency and Illinois Department of Natural Resources was contacted
to determine the location of repetitive loss structures in Franklin County. Records indicate that there are
two repetitive loss structures within the county. The total amount paid for building replacement and
building contents for damage to these repetitive loss structures is $23,333. Table 4-31 describes the
repetitive loss structures for each jurisdiction.
Table 4-31. Repetitive Loss Structures for each Jurisdiction in Franklin County Jurisdiction Number of Losses Total Paid
West Frankfort 3 $14,484.76
West Frankfort 3 $8,848.52
Total: 6 $23,333.28
Geographic Location of Flooding Most riverine flooding in Illinois occurs during either the spring or summer and is the result of excessive
rainfall and/or the combination of rainfall and snowmelt. Flash flooding of low-lying areas in Illinois can
occur during any time of the year, but tends to be less frequent and more localized between mid-summer
and early winter.
The primary sources of river flooding in Franklin are the Big Muddy River and its major tributaries: the
Green River, Ewing Creek, and Andy Creek. The Big Muddy River can potentially flood portions West City,
Buckner, Orient, and Freeman Spur. Flooding of Ewing Creek and its tributaries can potential impact
northern portions West Frankfort and a very small portion in the village of Thompsonville. Andy Creek can
potential flood portions of Christopher and Buckner. Flooding along these streams can block important
transportation such as State Routes 14, 34, 148, and 149. Flash flooding in Franklin County typically occurs
or is best documented in urban/developed areas. For example flash flooding has resulted in the closure
of US 51 through Du Quoin and several side streets in the towns of Du Quoin and Pinckneyville.
Flash flooding in Franklin County typically occurs or is best documented in urban/developed areas. For
example, on June 27, 2002 a slow-moving complex of thunderstorms with torrential rain caused major
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 51
problems over much of Franklin County, especially at Benton and West City. Firefighters rescued an elderly
woman who needed assistance getting out of rising floodwater in her cellar. The water was about 18
inches deep when she was rescued. In another incident in Franklin County, sheriff deputies aided a woman
whose car was swept off Highway 37. The car was swept into a flooded ditch, and ropes were used to get
the woman to safety. Flooded streets, yards, and basements were common in Benton and West City.
Some of the streets were closed, and several motorists became stranded while trying to drive through
flooded areas.
Hazard Extent for Flooding All floodplains are susceptible to flooding in Franklin County. The floodplain of concern is for the 100-year
flood event which is defined as areas that have a 1% chance of flooding in any given year. However,
flooding is dependent on various local factors including, but not limited to, impervious surfaces, amount
of precipitation, river-training structures, etc. The 100-year flood plain covers approximately 11% of
Franklin County
Vulnerability Analysis for Flooding The 2013 Illinois Hazard Mitigation Plan analyzed a variety potential natural hazards including vulnerability
to flooding. A Flood Vulnerability Index (FVI) was calculated for all counties and jurisdictions in Illinois. FVI
combines Hazus-based estimates of flood exposure and loss with the widely utilized Social Vulnerability
Index (SoVI). The highest vulnerability scores and vulnerability ratings were generally in rural counties and
communities located along Illinois’s large rivers (i.e., Mississippi, Green, Illinois, Kaskaskia, Rock and Ohio
Rivers). Figure 4-18 displays the Flood Vulnerability Ratings for the 102 Counties in Illinois. The
vulnerability ratings are categorically representations (low, average, elevated, or high) of the flood
vulnerability index. Franklin County has an Elevated Flood Vulnerability Rating and ranks 20 out of the
102 Counties in Illinois in terms of loss estimation according to Hazus-MH for floods.
Table 4-32 lists the jurisdictional Flood Vulnerability Ratings for Franklin County. The jurisdictions of
Franklin County all surpass an average Flood Vulnerability Rating.
Table 4-32. Jurisdictional Flood Vulnerability Ranking for Franklin County Jurisdiction State Ranking Flood Vulnerability Rating
Benton 81 Elevated
Buckner 77 Elevated
Christopher 83 Elevated
Freeman Spur 33 Elevated
North City 69 Elevated
Orient 47 Elevated
Royalton 60 Elevated
Thompsonville 86 Elevated
Valier 75 Elevated
West City 82 Elevated
West Frankfort 57 Elevated
Zeigler 59 Elevated
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 52
Figure 4-18. County Flood Vulnerability Rating for Illinois
Because all floodplains are susceptible to flooding in Franklin County; therefore, the population and all
buildings located within the floodplain are vulnerable to flooding. To accommodate this risk, this plan
considers all buildings located within 100-year flood plain as vulnerable.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 53
Risk Identification for Flood Hazard Based on historical information and the Flood Vulnerability Rating, future occurrence of flooding in
Franklin County is likely. According to the Risk Priority Index (RPI) and County input, flooding is ranked as
the number five hazard.
Critical Facilities All critical facilities within the floodplain are vulnerable to floods. An essential facility will encounter many
of the same impacts as other buildings within the flood boundary. These impacts can include structural
failure, extensive water damage to the facility, and loss of facility functionality (e.g., a damaged police
station cannot serve the community). Appendix E include a list of the critical facilities in Franklin County
and Appendix F displays a large format map of the locations of all critical facilities within the county.
Building Inventory All buildings within the floodplain are vulnerable to floods. These impacts can include structural failure,
extensive water damage to the facility, and loss of facility functionality (e.g., damaged home will no longer
be habitable, causing residents to seek shelter). This plan considers all buildings located within 100-year
flood plain as vulnerable.
Infrastructure The types of infrastructure potentially impacted by a flood include roadways, utility lines/pipes, railroads,
and bridges. Since an extensive inventory of the infrastructure is not available for this plan, it is important
to emphasize that a flood could damage any number of these items. The impacts to these items include:
broken, failed, or impassable roadways; broken or failed utility lines (e.g., loss of power or gas to
community); or railway failure from broken or impassable railways. Bridges could also fail or become
impassable, causing risk to motorists.
Hazus-MH Flood Analysis Hazus-MH was utilized to generate the flood depth grid for a 100-year return period and made
calculations by clipping the USGS one-third-arc-second DEM (~10 m) to the flood boundary. Next, Hazus-
MH was used to estimate the damages for Franklin County by utilizing a detailed building inventory
database created from assessor and parcel data.
According to this analysis, there are 445 buildings located in the Franklin County 100-year floodplain. The
estimated damage to these structures is $482 million. It should be noted that the results should be
interpreted as degrees of loss rather than exact number of buildings exposed to flooding. Figure 4-19
depicts the building inventory within the 100-year floodplain and Table 4-33 shows the loss estimates by
occupancy class.
Risk Priority Index
Probability x Magnitude = RPI 3 x 2 = 6
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 54
Figure 4-19. Building Inventory Located within the 100-year Floodplain in Franklin County
Table 4-33. Estimated Flood Losses within the 100-year Floodplain
Occupancy Class Number of Structures Estimated Building Related Losses
Residential 378 $10,823,759
Commercial 29 $438,637,156
Industrial 10 $32,129,883
Agricultural 28 $409,599
Total: 445 $482,000,397
Essential Facilities Damage The analysis identified zero essential facilities that are subject to flooding.
Vulnerability Analysis to Future Assets/Infrastructure Flooding may affect nearly any location within the county; there for all buildings and infrastructure are
vulnerable. Table 4-8 includes the building exposure for Franklin County. All essential facilities in the
county are at risk. Appendix E include a list of the essential facilities in Franklin County and Appendix F
displays a large format map of the locations of all critical facilities within the county. Currently, the
municipal planning commission reviews new developments for compliance with the local flood zoning
ordinance. At this time no new construction is planned with the 100-year floodplain.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 55
Suggestions for Community Development Trends Reducing floodplain development is crucial to reducing flood-related damages. Areas with recent
development may be more vulnerable to drainage issues. Storm drains and sewer systems are usually
most susceptible to drainage issues. Damage to these can cause back-up of water, sewage, and debris
into homes and basements, causing structural and mechanical damage as well as creating public health
hazards and unsanitary conditions.
4.3.7 Ground Failure Hazard
Hazard Definition According to the USGS, the term ground failure is generally referred to landslides, liquefaction, lateral
spreads, and any other consequence of shaking that affects the stability of the ground. In Illinois, ground
failure is typically associated with subsidence of the land surface related to soluble rock (karst), sink holes,
or underground mining.
Subsidence Related to Karst Features
Subsidence can occur on land located over soluble bedrock. The land over such bedrock often has topography characteristic of past subsidence events. This topography is termed “karst.” Karst terrain has unique landforms and hydrology found only in these areas. Bedrock in a karst areas are typically limestone, dolomite, or gypsum. In Illinois, limestone and dolomite (carbonate rocks) are the principle karst rock types. 9% of Illinois has carbonate rock types close enough to the ground surface to have a well-developed karst terrain. The area in Illinois in which the karst terrain is most developed is the southern and southwestern part of the state (Panno, et al., 1997). The karst feature most associated with subsidence is the sinkhole.
Sinkhole Formation and Collapse
A sinkhole is an area of ground that has no natural external surface drainage—when it rains, all of the water stays inside the sinkhole and typically drains into the subsurface. Sinkholes can vary from a few feet to hundreds of acres and from less than one to more than 100 feet deep. Typically, sinkholes form slowly, so that little change is seen during a lifetime, but they also can form suddenly when a collapse occurs. Such a collapse can have a dramatic effect if it occurs in a populated setting. Sinkholes form where rainwater moves through the soil and encounters soluble bedrock. The bedrock begins to dissolve along horizontal and vertical cracks and joints in the rock. Eventually, these cracks become large enough to start transporting small soil particles. As these small particles of soil are carried off, the surface of the soil above the conduit slump down gradually, and a small depression forms on the ground surface. This depression acts like a funnel and gathers more water, which makes the conduit still larger and washes more soil into the conduit. Sudden collapse of a sinkhole occurs where the soil close to the ground surface does not initially slump down, but instead forms a bridge. Beneath that surface cover, a void forms where the soil keeps washing into the conduit. These voids are essentially shallow caves. Over time, the void enlarges enough that the weight of the overlying bridge can no longer be supported. The surface layer then suddenly collapses into the void, forming a sinkhole. The process of forming a conduit and a soil bridge usually takes years to decades to form. However this natural process can be aggravated and expedited by human activates. Since the
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 56
process of forming a sinkhole depends on water to carry soil particle down into the karst bedrock, anything that increases the amount of water flowing into the subsurface can accelerate sinkhole formation process. Parking lots, streets, altered drainage from construction, and roof drainage are a few of the things that can increase runoff. Collapses are more frequent after intense rainstorms. However, drought and altering of the water table can also contribute to sinkhole collapse. Areas where the water table fluctuates or has suddenly been lowered are more susceptible to sinkhole collapse. (White, 1988)
Underground Mining and Subsidence
Underground mines have been used extensively in Illinois to extract coal, lead, zinc, fluorites, shale, clay stones, limestone, and dolomite. When mining first began in Illinois, land over mined areas was sparsely populated. If the ground subsided, homes or other structures were seldom damaged. As towns and cities expanded over mined-out areas, subsidence damage to structures became increasingly more common. The most common underground mines in Illinois are coal mines. A recent study in Illinois has found that about 333,100 housing units were located over or adjacent to 839,000 acres mined for coal (Bauer, 2008). Illinois has abundant coal resources. All or parts of 86 of 102 counties in the state have coal-bearing strata. As of 2007, about 1,050,400 acres (2.8% of the state) have been mined. Of that total, 836,655 acres are underground mines (Bauer, 2008). Illinois ranks first among all U.S. states for reserves of bituminous coal (Illinois Coal Association, 1992). There are two fundamental underground mining methods used in Illinois: high-extraction methods such as long-wall and low-extraction room-and pillar mining. High-extraction methods remove almost all of the coal in localized areas. For modern mining practices, subsidence associated with high-extraction methods is planned and regulated by state and federal authorities. The subsurface subsides above the mine within several days or weeks after the coal has been removed. Subsidence of the over-burden above the mined-out area can continue up to seven years after subsurface removal, depending on the local geologic conditions (Bauer, 2008). The initial ground movements associated with this mining, which tend to be the largest, diminish rapidly after a few months. After subsidence has decreased to a level that no longer causes damage to structures, the land may be suitable for development. The maximum amount of subsidence is proportional to the amount of material extract and the depth between the mining and the surface. In general, over the centerline of the mine panel, subsidence can be 60 to 70% of the extract material (e.g., 10ft of material extracted would cause a maximum subsidence of six to seven feet; Bauer, 2006). For low-extraction techniques such a room-and-pillar mining, miners create openings (rooms) as they work. Enough of the coal layer is left behind in the pillars to support the ground surface. In Illinois this system of mining extracts 40% to 55% of the coal resources in modern mines and up to 75% is some older mines. Based on current state regulations, room-and-pillar mines in operation after 1983 that do not include planned subsidence must show that they have a stable design. Although these permitting requirements have improved overall mine stability, there are no guarantees that subsidence will not occur above a room-and-pillar mine in the future. In general, if coal or other mined resources has been removed from an area, subsidence of the overlying material is always a possibility (Bauer, 2006).
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 57
In Illinois, subsidence of the land surface related to underground mining undertakes two forms: pit subsidence or trough (sag) subsidence. Pit subsidence structures are generally six to eight feet deep and range from two to 40 feet in diameter. Pit subsidence mostly occurs over shallow mines that are <100 feet deep and where the overlying bedrock is <50 feet thick and composed of weak rock materials such as shale. The pit is produced when the mine roof collapses and the roof fall void works its way to the surface. These structures form rapidly. If the bedrock is only a few feet thick and the surface material are unconsolidated (loose), these material may fall into adjacent mine voids, producing a surface hole deeper than the height of the collapse mine void. Pit subsidence can cause damage to a structure if it develops under the corner a building or support post of a foundation or other critical location. Subsidence pits should be filled to ensure that people or animals don’t fall into these structures (Bauer, 2006). Trough (or “sag”) subsidence forms a gentle depression over a broad area. Some trough subsidence may be as large as a whole mine panel (i.e. several hundred feet long and a few hundred feet wide). Several acres of land may be affected by a single trough event or feature. As discussed above, the maximum vertical settlement is 60% to 70% of the height of material removed (e.g., two to six feet). Significant troughs may develop suddenly (in a few hours or days) or gradually over a period of years. Troughs originate over places in mines where pillar have collapsed, producing downward movement at the ground surface. These failures can develop over mines of any depth. Trough subsidence produce an orderly pattern of tensile features (tension cracks) surrounding a central area of possible compression features. The type and extent of damage to surface structures relate to their orientation and position within a trough. In the tension zone, the downward-bending movements that develop in the ground may damage buildings, roads, sewer and water pipes, and other utilities. The downward bending of the ground surface causes the soil to crack, forming the tension cracks that pull structures apart. In the relatively smaller compression zone, roads my buckle and foundation walls may be pushed inward. Buildings damaged by compressional forces typically need their foundations rebuilt and leveled (Bauer, 2006).
Previous Occurrences of Ground Failure In Franklin County, undermined areas are generally located throughout the entire center portion of the
County. Throughout the history of mining in Southern Illinois, there have been numerous mining
accidents. More recently on November 4, 2013 at approximately 1:50 p.m. (CST), a miner was fatally
injured when shoveling coal and loose rock between the coal face and the longwall panline. The accident
occurred at the MC#1 Mine located near Macedonia in Franklin County. The miner received crushing
injuries when a solid piece of coal and cap rock fell from the coal face, striking his mid to lower back,
pinning him against the working face side of the panline. The mine operator did not have effective policies,
programs, procedures, or controls in place to protect miners from a fall of the longwall roof or face while
miners are positioned on the panline or between the panline and the longwall face (U.S. Department of
Labor Mine Safety and Health Administration, 2015)
Geographic Location for Ground Failure Illinois is usually associated with either underground mining or collapse of soil into crevice in underling
soluble bedrock. Areas at risk for subsidence can be determined from detailed mapping of geologic
conditions or detailed mine maps.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 58
Hazard Extent for Ground Failure The extent of ground failure hazard in Franklin County is a function of where current development is
located relative to (1) areas of past and present underground mining, and (2) areas of soluble bedrock.
Risk Identification for Ground Failure Based on historical information and the underlying geology of Franklin County, the occurrence of future
ground failure is likely. According to the Franklin County Planning Team’s assessment, ground failure is
ranked as the number six hazard.
Vulnerability Analysis for Ground Failure The Southern Illinois region has a rich history in coal mining. Nearly two-thirds of Franklin County is
underlain by rock units which potentially contain coal and therefore subsidence from sinkholes should not
be a concern. However, ground failure due to mine subsidence has potential. To accommodate this risk,
this plan considers all buildings located within the county as vulnerable. Tables 4-7 and 4-8 display the
existing buildings and critical infrastructure in Franklin County.
Critical Facilities Any critical facility built above highly soluble bedrock could be vulnerable to ground failure. A critical
facility will encounter the same impacts as any other building within the affected area. These impacts
include damages ranging from cosmetic to structural. Buildings may sustain minor cracks in walls due to
a small amount of settling, while in more severe cases, the failure of building foundations can cause
cracking of critical structural elements. Table 4-7 lists the types and number of critical facilities for the
entire county and Appendix F displays a large format map of the locations of all critical facilities within the
county.
Building Inventory Table 4-8 lists the building exposure in terms of types and numbers of buildings for the entire county. The
buildings within the county can expect similar impacts to those discussed for critical facilities, ranging
from cosmetic to structural. Buildings may sustain minor cracks in walls due to a small amount of settling,
while in more severe cases, the failure of building foundations causes cracking of critical structural
elements.
Infrastructure In the area of Franklin County potentially affected by ground failure, the types of infrastructure that could
be impacted include roadways, utility lines/pipes, railroads, and bridges. The risk to these structures is
primarily associated with land collapsing directly beneath them in a way that undermines their structural
integrity. The impacts to these items include broken, failed, or impassable roadways; broken or failed
utility lines (i.e. loss of power or gas to community); and railway failure from broken or impassable
railways. In addition bridges could fail or become impassable causing risk to traffic.
Risk Priority Index
Probability x Magnitude = RPI 3 x 2 = 6
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 59
GIS-based Analysis of Ground Failure This section provides an overview of the ground failure hazards in Illinois in general and a discussion of
the potential subsidence risk for Franklin County. Ground failure in Illinois is usually associated with either
underground mining or collapse of soil into crevice in underling soluble bedrock. Areas at risk for ground
failure can be determined from detailed mapping of geologic conditions or detailed mine maps. Figure 4-
20 displays data sources that compiled from the Illinois State Geologic Survey (ISGS) and Illinois
Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) to assess the risk of ground failure in Franklin County.
Figure 4-20. Distribution of Bedrock with Potential Coal Bearing Strata, Karst, Sinkholes and Mining Efforts
Figure 4-20(A) shows statewide distribution of bedrock with karst potential, coal bearing strata, sink holes.
Figure 4-20(B) shows the counties which are 0, <1% and >1% undermined. Nearly all of Franklin County is
underlain by rock units which contain coal and is >1% undermined. The Mine Subsidence Insurance Act of
1979 created subsidence insurance as part of an Illinois homeowner’s policy. Homeowners in any of the
Illinois counties undermined by approximately 1% or more automatically have mine subsidence insurance
as a part of their policy, unless coverage is waived in writing. Mine subsidence insurance is especially
important for homes located near or over mines that operated before the 1977 Surface Mine Control and
Reclamation Act. The companies that operated these mines may no longer be in business (Bauer, 2006).
Figure 4-21 shows the distribution of bedrock with karst potential, coal bearing strata, sink holes, and
underground mines in Franklin County. Analysis of the GIS data layer of active and abandoned coal mines
in Illinois obtained from the IDNR revealed that 159 mi2 out of Franklin County’s total 432 mi2 (~37%) have
been undermined. The undermined areas are ground throughout the entire center portion of the county.
Comparison of Franklin County local assessment and parcel data with IDNR GIS layer of active and
abandoned underground-coal mines was performed. This analysis revealed that 10,435 buildings or ~56%
of the buildings in the county are located above undermined areas.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 60
In addition to mine subsidence, subsidence can also occur on land located over soluble bedrock. The land
over such bedrock is termed “karst.” The karst feature most associated with subsidence is the sinkhole.
Nearly all of Franklin County is insoluble bedrock, and therefor subsidence from this mechanism should
not be a concern.
Figure 4-21. Distribution of potential sinkholes and underground mines in Franklin County
Vulnerability to Future Assets/Infrastructure for Ground Failure New buildings and infrastructure placed on undermined land or on highly soluble bedrock will be
vulnerable to ground failure.
Suggestions of Community Development Trends Abandoned underground mine subsidence may affect several locations within the county; therefore
buildings and infrastructure are vulnerable to subsidence. Continued development will occur in many of
these areas. Currently, Franklin County reviews new development for compliance with the local zoning
ordinance. Newly planned construction should be reviewed with the historical mining maps to minimize
potential subsidence structural damage.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 61
4.3.8 Winter Storm Hazard
Hazard Definition of Winter Storm Hazard Severe winter weather consists of various forms of precipitation and weather conditions. This may include
one or more of the following: freezing rain, sleet, heavy snow, blizzards, icy roadways, extreme low
temperatures, and strong winds. These conditions can cause human health risks such as frostbite,
hypothermia, or death and cause property damage and disrupt economic activity.
Ice or sleet, even in small quantities, can result in hazardous driving conditions and can cause property
damage. Sleet involves raindrops that freeze completely before reaching the ground. Sleet does not stick
to trees and wires. Ice storms, on the other hand, involve liquid rain that falls through subfreezing air
and/or onto sub-freezing surfaces, freezing on contact with those surfaces. The ice coats trees, buildings,
overhead wires, and roadways, sometimes causing extensive damage.
Ice storms are some of the most damaging winter storms in Illinois. Ice storms occur when moisture-
laden Gulf air converges with the northern jet stream causing freezing rain that coats power and
communication lines and trees with heavy ice. Strong winds can cause the overburdened limbs and cables
to snap; leaving large sectors of the population without power, heat, or communication.
Rapid accumulation of snow, often accompanied by high winds, cold temperatures, and low visibility,
characterize significant snowstorms. A blizzard is categorized as a snow storm with winds of 35 miles per
hour or greater and/or visibility of less than one-quarter mile for three or more hours. Strong winds during
a blizzard blow falling and fallen snow, creating poor visibility and impassable roadways. Blizzards
potentially result in property damage.
Blizzards repeatedly affect Illinois. Blizzard conditions cause power outages, loss of communication, and
transportation difficulties. Blizzards can reduce visibility to less than one-quarter mile, and the resulting
disorientation makes even travel by foot dangerous if not deadly.
Severe cold involves ambient air temperatures that drop to 0°F or below. These extreme temperatures
can increase the likelihood of frostbite and hypothermia. High winds during severe cold events can
enhance the air temperature’s effects. Fast winds during cold weather events can lower the wind chill
factor (how cold the air feels on your skin). As a result, the time it takes for frostbite and hypothermia to
affect a person’s body will decrease.
Previous Occurrences of Winter Storm Hazard The NCDC database reported 159 winter storm and extreme cold events for Franklin County since 1950.
The most recent reported event occurred in April 2014 when a high pressure system moved east across
the Ohio Valley bringing unseasonably cold air and widespread freezing temperatures. Lows were from
28 to 32 degrees at many locations in southern Illinois. The coldest observed temperature was 28 degrees
at the Mount Vernon airport. Other lows included 31 degrees at the Carbondale airport and at Metropolis.
Table 4-34 identifies NCDC-recorded winter storm events that caused damage, death, or injury in Franklin
County.
Table 4-34. NCDC-Recorded Winter Storms that Caused Damage, Death, or Injury in Franklin County Location or County* Date Deaths Injuries Property Damage
Franklin County 1/1/1999 0 0 $50,000
Franklin County 3/3/2008 0 0 $30,000
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 62
Location or County* Date Deaths Injuries Property Damage
Franklin County 1/26/2009 0 0 $250,000
Total: 0 0 $330,000
Geographic Location of Winter Storm Hazard Severe winter storms are regional in nature. Most of the NCDC data are calculated regionally or in some
cases statewide.
Hazard Extent of Winter Storm Hazard The extent of the historical winter storms varies in terms of storm location, temperature, and ice or
snowfall. A severe winter storm can occur anywhere in the county.
Risk Identification of Winter Storm Hazard Based on historical information, the probability of future winter storms in Franklin County is likely. The
county should expect winter storms with varying magnitudes to occur in the future. Winter storms ranked
as the number seven hazard according to the Franklin County Planning Team’s risk assessment.
Vulnerability Analysis of Winter Storm Hazard Winter storm impacts are equally likely across the entire county; therefore, the entire county is vulnerable
to a winter storm and can expect impacts within the affected area. To accommodate this risk, this plan
considers all buildings located within the county as vulnerable. Tables 4-7 and 4-8 display the existing
buildings and critical infrastructure in Franklin County.
Critical Facilities All critical facilities are vulnerable to winter storms. A critical facility will encounter many of the same
impacts as other buildings within the county. These impacts include loss of gas or electricity from broken
or damaged utility lines, damaged or impassable roads and railways, broken water pipes, and roof collapse
from heavy snow. Table 4-7 lists the types and number of critical facilities for the entire county and
Appendix F displays a large format map of the locations of all critical facilities within the county.
Building Inventory Table 4-8 lists the building exposure in terms of types and numbers of buildings for the entire county. The impacts to the general buildings within the county are similar to the damages expected to the critical facilities. These include loss of gas or electricity from broken or damaged utility lines, damaged or impassable roads and railways, broken water pipes, and roof collapse from heavy snow.
Infrastructure During a winter storm, the types of potentially impacted infrastructure include roadways, utility lines/pipes, railroads, and bridges. Since the county’s entire infrastructure is vulnerable, it is important to emphasize that a winter storm could impact any structure. Potential impacts include broken gas and/or electricity lines or damaged utility lines, damaged or impassable roads and railways, and broken water pipes.
Risk Priority Index
Probability x Magnitude = RPI 4 x 1 = 4
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 63
Potential Dollar Losses from Winter Storm Hazard According to the NDCD, Franklin County has incurred approximately $100,000 in damages relating to
winter storms since 1950. NCDC records are estimates of damage compiled by the National Weather
Service from various local, state, and federal sources. However, these estimates are often preliminary in
nature and may not match the final assessment of economic and property losses related to a given
weather event. As a result, the potential dollar losses for a future event cannot be reliably constrained;
however, based on average property damage in the past decade, SIU estimates that Franklin County incurs
property damages of approximately $5,000 per year related to winter storms, including sleet/ice and
heavy snow.
Vulnerability to Future Assets/Infrastructure for Winter Storm Hazard Any new development within the county will remain vulnerable to these events.
Suggestions for Community Development Trends Because winter storm events are regional in nature, future development across the county will also face winter storms.
4.3.9 Dam and Levee Failure
Hazard Definition for Dam and Levee Failure Dams are structures that retain or detain water behind a large barrier. When full or partially full, the
difference in elevation between the water above the dam and below creates large amounts of potential
energy, creating the potential for failure. The same potential exists for levees when they serve their
purpose, which is to confine flood waters within the channel area of a river and exclude that water from
land or communities land-ward of the levee. Dams and levees can fail due to either: 1) water heights or
flows above the capacity for which the structure was designed; or 2) deficiencies in the structure such
that it cannot hold back the potential energy of the water. If a dam or levee fails, issues of primary concern
include loss of human life/injury, downstream property damage, lifeline disruption (of concern would be
transportation routes and utility lines required to maintain or protect life), and environmental damage.
Many communities view both dams and levees as permanent and infinitely safe structures. This sense of
security may well be false, leading to significantly increased risks. Both downstream of dams and on
floodplains protected by levees, security leads to new construction, added infrastructure, and increased
population over time. Levees in particular are built to hold back flood waters only up to some maximum
level, often the 100-year (1% annual probability) flood event. When that maximum is exceeded by more
than the design safety margin, then the levee will be overtopped or otherwise fail, inundating
communities in the land previously protected by that levee. It has been suggested that climate change,
land-use shifts, and some forms of river engineering may be increasing the magnitude of large floods and
the frequency of levee-failure situations.
In addition to failure that results from extreme floods above the design capacity, levees and dams can fail
due to structural deficiencies. Both dams and levees require constant monitoring and regular
maintenance to assure their integrity. Many structures across the U.S. have been under-funded or
otherwise neglected, leading to an eventual day of reckoning in the form either of realization that the
structure is unsafe or, sometimes, an actual failure. The threat of dam or levee failure may require
substantial commitment of time, personnel, and resources. Since dams and levees deteriorate with age,
minor issues become larger compounding problems, and the risk of failure increases.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 64
Previous Occurrences of Dam and Levee Failure According to Franklin County historical records, there are no records or local knowledge of any dam or
certified levee failure in the county.
Geographic Location of Dams and Levees in Franklin County A review of the US Army Corps of Engineers National Levee Database and IDNR records revealed no levees
within Franklin County.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers maintains the National Inventory of Dams (NID) which identified 32
dams in Franklin County. According to NID records, four dams in Franklin County are classified as high
hazard and eight dams have Emergency Action Plans (EAP). Table 4-35 list of the dams located in Franklin
County and their respective classification level.
Table 4-35. Franklin County Dam Inventory Dam Name Stream/River Hazard Rating EAP
New West Frankfort Dam Stevens Creek, Tributary Ewing Creek High Yes
Zeigler City Lake Dam Tributary Big Muddy River Significant No
Valier Lake Dam Andy Creek High No
Freeman United/Lake Dam Tributary Middle Fork Big Muddy River Significant No
Old West Frankfort Dam Tilley Creek Significant Yes
Cambon Lake Dam Tributary Big Muddy River Significant No
Sesser Reservoir Dam Tributary Sandusky Creek Low No
Cristopher Old Reservoir Dam Tributary Andy Creek Significant No
Beaver Lake Dam Tributary Big Muddy River Significant No
Buckner Reservoir Dam Off Stream Significant No
Lake Hamilton Dam Marcum Branch Significant No
Lake Moses Dam Tributary Drummond Branch Significant No
Christopher New Reservoir Dam Tributary Andy Creek Low No
Lake Benton Dam Marcum Branch Significant No
Old Ben/Mine 21/Slurry Cell 2 Dam Tributary Jackie Branch Low No
Old Ben/Mine 21/Slurry Cell 3 Dam Tributary Jackie Branch Low Yes
Old Ben/Mine 24/Sediment And Slurry Dam Tributary Big Muddy River Low No
Old Ben/Mine 24/North Pond Dam Tributary Sugar Creek Low No
Old Ben/Mine 21/Reservoir Dam Jackie Branch Significant No
Old Ben/Mine 21/Slurry Cell 4 Dam Tributary Jackie Branch Significant Yes
Old Ben/Mine 26/Slurry Cell 4 Dam Sandusky Creek Low No
Old Ben/24/Freshwater Lake Dam Tributary Big Muddy River Low No
Old Ben/Mine 24/Slurry Cell 2 Dam Tributary Big Muddy River Low No
Old Ben/Mine 26/Slurry Cell 3 Dam Tributary Rend Lake Significant Yes
Old Ben/John Ross Plant/Slurry Cell 2 Tributary Tilley Creek High Yes
Old Ben Coal Co/John Ross/Sediment Pond Tributary Tilley Creek Significant Yes
Rend Lake Dam Big Muddy River High Yes
Mine No.21 Significant No
Mine No.24 Significant No
Mine No.25 Significant No
Mine No.26 Significant No
Consol/Rend Lake Mine/Sediment Tributary Silver Creek Low No
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 65
Hazard Extent for Dam and Levee Failure Dams are assigned a low hazard potential classification means that failure or incorrect operation of the
dam will result in no human life losses and no economic or environmental losses. Losses are principally
limited to the owner’s property. A significant hazard classification means that failure or incorrect
operation results in no probable loss of human life; however, dam or levee failure can cause economic
loss, environmental damage, and disruption of lifeline facilities. Significant hazard potential dams are
often located in predominantly rural or agricultural areas, but could be located in populated areas with a
significant amount of infrastructure. A high hazard potential classification means that failure or incorrect
operation has the highest risk to cause loss of human life and to significantly damage buildings and
infrastructure.
According to NID records, four dams in Franklin County are classified as high hazard and eight dams have
Emergency Action Plans (EAP). An EAP is not required by the State of Illinois but is recommended in the
2003 Illinois Dam Safety & Inspection Manual.
Risk Identification for Dam and Levee Failure Based on operation and maintenance requirements and local knowledge of the dams and levees in
Franklin County, the probability of failure is possible. However, if a high-hazard dam failed, the magnitude
and severity of the damage could be great. The warning time and duration of the dam failure event would
be very short. Based on input from the Planning Team, future occurrence of dam failure in Franklin County
is likely. According to the Risk Priority Index (RPI) and County input, flooding is ranked as the number
eight hazard.
Vulnerability Analysis for Dam and Levee Failure An Emergency Action Plan (EAP) is required to assess the effect of dam failure on these communities. In
order to be considered creditable flood protection structures on FEMA’s flood maps, levee owners must
provide documentation to prove the levee meets design, operation, and maintenance standards for
protection against the 1% annual probability flood.
Because all floodplains are susceptible to flooding in Franklin County; therefore, the population and all
buildings located within the floodplain are vulnerable to dam and levee failure. To accommodate this risk,
this plan considers all buildings located within 100-year flood plain as vulnerable.
Critical Facilities All critical facilities within the floodplain are vulnerable to dam and levee failure. An essential facility will
encounter many of the same impacts as other buildings within the flood boundary. These impacts can
include structural failure, extensive water damage to the facility, and loss of facility functionality (e.g., a
damaged police station cannot serve the community). Table 4-7 lists the types and number of critical
facilities for the entire county and Appendix F displays a large format map of the locations of all critical
facilities within the county.
Risk Priority Index
Probability x Magnitude = RPI 1 x 4 = 4
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 66
Building Inventory All buildings within the floodplain are vulnerable to floods as a result of dam and/or levee failure. These
impacts can include structural failure, extensive water damage to the facility, and loss of facility
functionality (e.g., damaged home will no longer be habitable, causing residents to seek shelter). This plan
considers all buildings located within 100-year flood plain as vulnerable.
Infrastructure The types of infrastructure potentially impacted by a flood include roadways, utility lines/pipes, railroads,
and bridges. Since an extensive inventory of the infrastructure is not available for this plan, it is important
to emphasize that a flood could damage any number of these items. The impacts to these items include:
broken, failed, or impassable roadways; broken or failed utility lines (e.g., loss of power or gas to
community); or railway failure from broken or impassable railways. Bridges could also fail or become
impassable, causing risk to motorists.
Hazus-MH Flood Analysis See section 4.3.6 Flooding Hazard for the results of the Hazus-MH Flood Analysis.
Vulnerability to Future Assets/Infrastructure for Dam and Levee Failure Flooding as a result of dam or levee failure may affect nearly any location within the county; there for all
buildings and infrastructure are vulnerable. Table 4-8 includes the building exposure for Franklin County.
All essential facilities in the county are at risk. Appendix E include a list of the essential facilities in Franklin
County and Appendix F displays a large format map of the locations of all critical facilities within the
county. Currently, the municipal planning commission reviews new developments for compliance with
the local flood zoning ordinance. At this time no new construction is planned with the 100-year floodplain.
Suggestions for Community Development Trends Reducing floodplain development is crucial to reducing flood-related damages. Areas with recent
development may be more vulnerable to drainage issues. Storm drains and sewer systems are usually
most susceptible to drainage issues. Damage to these can cause back-up of water, sewage, and debris
into homes and basements, causing structural and mechanical damage as well as creating public health
hazards and unsanitary conditions.
4.3.10 Disease Outbreaks, Epidemics, and Pandemics
Hazard Definition Disease outbreaks, epidemics, and pandemics can have devastating consequences on people and the
community at large. These types of hazards have the potential of affecting a large number of people and
posing significant harm with its ability to seriously diminish people’s health and cause death. Dependent
upon the situation, these public health hazards can last from days to years.
Disease Outbreaks occur when there is a sudden rise in a disease experienced by a community, region or
during a season, despite measures to deter disease spread. Outbreaks could be a single case of a
contagious disease, particularly if it is a novel disease or new to a community or remerges after a long
absence. An outbreak may be isolated to a single community or cover several countries.
Epidemics occur when an infectious disease spreads rapidly affecting people in several countries. Disease
outbreaks have the potential of becoming epidemics. Epidemics are common occurrences in the world
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 67
of the 21st century. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), every country on earth as
experienced at least one epidemic since the year 2000. The 2003 Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome
(SARS) in Asia and the 2014-15 Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) both started out as outbreaks, but became
epidemics. SARS ended up spreading to two dozen counties, infecting 8,098 people in which 774 people
died. Some public health incidents start out as epidemics, such as Swine Flu (H1N1) and Avian Flu (H5N1)
but result in global exposure (see Pandemic, below). Far more often, however, and with increasing
regularity, epidemics strike at lesser geographic levels.
Pandemics are disease outbreaks/epidemics that spread worldwide.
HIV/Aids is an example of one of the most destructive global
pandemics in history. The number of people affected by a pandemic
depends upon how severe the pandemic is. Pandemics are generally
classified by severity level: mild, moderate, or severe. Pandemics can
significantly impact segments of the population not usually affected
by seasonal flu, for instance, healthy adults between the ages of 20 –
50, (see more information on difference between pandemic and
seasonal flu later in this section). By infecting and causing death in
large numbers of people, pandemics can also cause significant
economic disruption and loss. Public health experts say it’s not a
matter of “if” a influenza pandemic will happen, but “when.”
CDC Pandemic Severity Index -The number of people affected by a
pandemic depends upon the severity of the pandemic. The Centers of
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has developed a Pandemic
Severity Index, with categories of increasing severity (Category 1 to
Category 5). The Pandemic Severity Index uses a ratio to estimate the
number of expected deaths. This index helps communities with
pandemic preparedness and planning.
Previous Occurrences of Disease Outbreak, Epidemics, and Pandemic Hazard Recently, the 2014 outbreak of the Ebola virus disease in several West African counties has prompted
changes in the way the public health industry mitigates and responds to epidemics and pandemics. It is
important to note that as of December 2014, only two imported cases, including one death, and two
locally acquired cases in healthcare workers have been reported in the United States. Common epidemic
and pandemic threats include (but not limited to) HIV/Aids, smallpox, tuberculosis, influenza, non-polio
enteroviruses, and foodborne outbreaks. This plan will only highlight the most recent non-polio
enteroviruses, influenza and foodborne illness records.
Non-Polio Enteroviruses are very common viruses that cause about 10 to 15 million infections in the
United States each year. All populations are susceptible to non-polio enteroviruses, however there is an
increased risk for infants, children, and teenagers due to a lack of immunity from previous exposures to
the viruses. The infection is spread via close contact or touching surfaces with the infection. Those who
become infected with the viruses do not get sick or come down with mild illnesses. Severe cases have the
potential to infect the heart, brain or even paralyze.
CDC Pandemic Severity Index
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 68
One of the most recent non-polio enteroviruses cases occurred from mid-August to December 11th, 2014.
The CDC confirmed a total of 1,149 people in 48 states and the District of Columbia with respiratory illness
caused by Enterovirus D68 (EV-D68). This virus was first identified in California in 1962 and is one of the
more than 100 non-polio enteroviruses. EV-D68 has been the most common type of enterovirus identified
in 2014, leading to increases in illnesses among children and affecting those with asthma most severely.
Influenza Pandemics (pandemic flu) occurs when a new type of influenza (flu) virus emerges, affecting the
health and lives of many people. As a serious respiratory illness, pandemic flu spreads quickly from person
to person because people have not been exposed to the new flu strain. Once exposed, individuals may
have little or no bodily resistance for fighting off the new, contagious type of flu. During the 20th century,
there were three major influenza pandemics.
The 1918 Spanish flu was the deadliest flu pandemic, infecting 20% to 40% of the world’s population. An
estimated 50 million died from the Spanish flu, 675,000 of which were from the United States. This was
a viral pandemic in which people could die quite suddenly. Instances occurred in which people reported
being well in the morning, felt sick during the day and had died by evening. Many individuals fighting this
virus succumbed to complications, such as pneumonia. Those most affected were adults between the
ages of 20-50, health individuals that typically are not the hardest hit by influenza.
“Asian flu” of 1957 and “Hong Kong flu” of 1968 caused approximately 1 - 4 million deaths. The 1957
pandemic originated in China and was a category 2 on the pandemic severity index. Eventually, the Asian
flu strain evolved, shifting initiating a milder 1968-69 Hong Kong flu pandemic infecting 500,000 people
The most recent pandemic was the H1N1 Flu Pandemic. On August 10th, 2010 the World Health
Organization announced that the world is now in a post-pandemic period where the 2009 flu pandemic
flu is expected to continue to circulate seasonally worldwide, causing variable levels of disease and
outbreaks. Table 4-25 displays the influenza pandemics since 1918.
Table 4-10. Influenza Pandemics since 1918 Name Date Subtype Deaths in the United States
1918-1919 Spanish Flu H1N1 675,000
1957-1958 Asian Flu H2N2 69,800
1986-1969 Hong Kong Flu H3N2 33,800
2009-2010 2009 Flu Pandemic / Swine Flu H1N1/09 8,870 - 18,300
Total: 787,470 – 796,900
Source: U.S. Department of Health & Human Services
Seasonal Flu and Pandemic Flu are both influenza viruses that affect the upper respiratory system of
people. Seasonal flu is the more common type of flu, emerging each year during the fall, winter, and
spring months. Seasonal flu continually circulates among people during each flu season, changing slightly
from year to year. Because of seasonal flu’s continual presence among people, individuals are more likely
to have acquired some bodily resistance, allowing them to fight off this flu strain better. Despite having
acquired some immunity, the CDC estimates that from the 1976-77 season to the 2006-07 flu season, flu-
associated deaths ranged from a low of about 3,000 to a high of about 49,000. FWBCHD and other health
organizations offer seasonal flu vaccinations annually to protect people from this changing virus.
Pandemic flu is a new type of virus, which means that people have little or no immunity to it. Pandemic
flu spreads quickly from person to person and can produce serious illness, usually significantly more
severe than seasonal flu.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 69
Foodborne Disease is a common public health problem. The CDC estimates that each year roughly 1 in 6
Americans get sick by consuming contaminated foods or beverages. Many different disease-causing
microbes, pathogens, or harmful toxins or chemicals can contaminate foods. There are eight known
pathogens that account for the vast majority of illnesses, hospitalizations, and deaths. Nontyphoidal
Salmonella, Toxoplasma, Listeria, and norovirus caused the most deaths. Table 4-26 identifies CDC-
recorded death related foodborne outbreaks with reported cases in Illinois. Reported hospitalizations and
deaths are national statistics for a given outbreak. Additional details of individual hazard events are on
the CDC website.
The most severe confirmed outbreak of foodborne disease occurred in 2011 after a multistate outbreak
of Listeria monocytogenes food poisoning linked to whole cantaloupes from Jensen Farms of Holly,
Colorado. A total of 33 deaths and 143 hospitalizations were reported to the CDC from 28 States.
Additionally, one woman pregnant at the time of illness had a miscarriage. Four people were infected in
the State of Illinois.
Table 4-11. Confirmed Foodborne Disease Outbreaks with reported cases in Illinois. Hospitalizations and Deaths are National Statistics for a given outbreak.
Year Genus Species Food Vehicle Total
Hospitalizations Total
Deaths
2011 Listeria monocytogenes Cantaloupe 143 33
2008 Salmonella enterica Peanut Butter; Peanut Paste 166 9
2006 E.coli, Shiga toxin-producing Spinach 103 5
2012 Salmonella enterica; Salmonella enterica Cantaloupe 94 3
2007 Salmonella enterica Pot Pie 108 3
1998 Salmonella enterica Tomato, Unspecified 16 3
2008 Salmonella enterica Pureed Food Diet 1 2
2008 Salmonella enterica Peppers, Jalapeno; Peppers, Serrano; Tomato, Unspecified 308 2
2003 Salmonella enterica Honeydew Melon 13 2
2012 Salmonella enterica Cantaloupe 11 1
2011 Salmonella enterica Ground Turkey, Unspecified 50 1
2010 Shigella sonnei Bread, Nine Grain; Tomatoes 13 1
2009 Salmonella enterica Melon 4 1
2008 Norovirus Genogroup II Lettuce Based Salads 3 1
2000 Salmonella enterica Salmon, Unspecified; Seafood Dish, Unspecified 10 1
Total: 1,043 68
*CDC Foodborne Outbreak Online Database was last updated on 5/28/2014 to include 2012 outbreak data. Reporting agencies (state, local, territorial, and tribal health departments, and CDC) can modify their reports at any time, even months or years after an outbreak. Therefore, results from Foodborne Outbreak Online Database are subject to change.
Geographic Location for Disease Outbreak, Epidemics, and Pandemic Hazard Because of the nature of pandemic disease, the entire country, continent, or whole world is at risk. An
epidemic can occur over a short period of time and strike at lesser geographic levels. Therefore the entire
county has the same risk of disease outbreak, epidemic, or pandemic hazard.
Hazard Extent for Disease Outbreak, Epidemics, and Pandemic Hazard
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 70
The extent of the hazard varies in terms of the physical characteristics of the disease outbreak, epidemic
or the pandemic (e.g., the number of people infected and strength of the virus).
Risk Identification for Disease Outbreak, Epidemics, and Pandemic Hazard Disease outbreaks, epidemics, and pandemics can occur within any area in the county; therefore, the
entire county population and all critical infrastructure are vulnerable. To accommodate this risk, this plan
considers all buildings located within the county as vulnerable. Tables 4-7 and 4-8 display the existing
buildings and critical infrastructure in Franklin County. The Franklin County Planning Team identified
disease outbreak, epidemic, and pandemic as a prioritized public health hazard. This plan includes a
section devoted to disease outbreak, epidemic, and pandemic but it should be noted that it is not included
in the ranked list of hazards.
Vulnerability Analysis A less severe pandemic and/or more severe epidemic would likely result in dramatic increases in the
number of hospitalizations and deaths. A severe pandemic would likely overwhelm the nation’s critical
healthcare services and impose significant stress on our nation’s critical infrastructure (including but not
limited to the airline and travel industry). Epidemic and pandemics can create a shortage of staff, facilities,
equipment, hospital beds, and other supplies needed to cope with the number of people who get the
pandemic flu. Alternative sites, such as schools, may serve as medical facilities.
Suggestions for Community Development Trends The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services and the State of Illinois Department of Public Health
provides guidance to communities, individuals, health professionals, businesses and schools on epidemic
and pandemic mitigation. Planning and preparedness information is disseminated via Flu.gov. Various
Fact sheets, tool kits, check lists and pre-pandemic planning guides are available. It is important that all
entities in the county are prepared because the federal government cannot prepare for or respond to the
challenge of a pandemic alone.
The Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) developed the 2007 Interim Pre-pandemic Planning
Guide for local communities to mitigation against pandemic influenza. The goals are to limit the spread of
a pandemic; mitigate disease, suffering, and death; and sustain infrastructure and lessen the impact on
the economy and the functioning of society. A pandemic influenza mitigation framework was created and
includes four mitigation interventions to help offset the effect on communities. Implementing these
interventions require advance planning. As such, the CDC warns of second- and third-order consequence
of the interventions which may require additional planning. Interventions include, but are not limited to:
1. Isolation and treatment (as appropriate) with influenza antiviral medications of all persons with confirmed or probable pandemic influenza. Isolation may occur in the home or healthcare setting, depending on the severity of an individual’s illness and /or the current capacity of the healthcare infrastructure.
2. Voluntary home quarantine of members of households with confirmed or probable influenza case(s) and consideration of combining this intervention with the prophylactic use of antiviral medications, providing sufficient quantities of effective medications exist and that a feasible means of distributing them is in place.
3. Dismissal of students from school (including public and private schools as well as colleges and universities) and school-based activities and closure of childcare programs, coupled with
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 4. Risk Assessment Page 71
protecting children and teenagers through social distancing in the community to achieve reductions of out-of-school social contacts and community mixing.
4. Use of social distancing measures to reduce contact between adults in the community and workplace, including, for example, cancellation of large public gatherings and alteration of workplace environments and schedules to decrease social density and preserve a healthy workplace to the greatest extent possible without disrupting essential services.
5. Additionally, one of the best and most effective mitigation strategies available to everyone is simply utilizing good hygiene practices, e.g., effectively washing hands frequently, effectively covering coughs and sneezes, and wiping down surfaces frequently shared by people, e.g., door knobs, counter surfaces, bathroom/kitchen faucet sink handles and bathroom toilet handles, etc.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 5. Mitigation Strategies Page 72
Section 5. Mitigation Strategies
The goal of mitigation is to reduce the future impacts of a hazard, including property damage, disruption
to local and regional economies, and the amount of public and private funds spent to assist with recovery.
Throughout the planning process, the Franklin County Planning Team worked to identify existing hazard
mitigation policies, develop mitigation goals, and a create a comprehensive range of mitigation strategies
specific to each jurisdiction. This work provides a blueprint for reducing the potential loses identified in
the risk assessment (section 4).
5.1 Ex ist ing Hazard Mit igat ion Pol ic ies, Programs and Resources This section documents each jurisdictions existing authorities, policies, programs and resources related to
hazard mitigation and the ability to improve these existing policies and programs. It is important to
highlight the work that has been completed in Franklin County that pertains to hazard mitigation. In
addition, the following information also provides an evaluation of these abilities to determine whether
they can be improved in order to more effectively reduce the impact of future hazards.
5.1.1 Successful Mitigation Projects To be successful, mitigation must be a recurrent process that is continually striving to lessen the impact of natural hazards within the county. The following are projects that have been successfully completed after Franklin County’s 2009 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan was formally adopted.
Rend Lake Water Main Bypass Rend Lake Conservancy District applied for HMGP funds to establish a bypass water main to protect service to Mount Vernon and several nearby communities. The water main runs underneath Rend Lake and is vulnerable to seismic disturbance. In the event of a major earthquake repairs will be difficult, costly, and time-consuming, leaving a large number of residents without water service for an extended period. The total cost of the project was $2,486,240. The new bypass main provides a backup in case the primary main is damaged, and will be much easier to access and repair in an emergency as it will avoid the lake.
West Frankfort Waste Water Treatment Plant Relocation The City of West Frankfort applied for HMGP funds to relocate critical components of a floodprone wastewater treatment plant. The nearby site also has some wastewater treatment components but is above the floodplain. Moving the vulnerable components to the other location protects the plant from flood damage. The total cost of the project was $8,554,250.
Community Development Assistance Program Community Development Assistance Program (CDAP) grants are awarded to units of local government
with populations of 50,000 or less that are not located within one of the six large urban counties that
receive funds directly from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The CDAP is a grant
program that assists Illinois communities by providing grants to local governments to help them in
financing economic development projects, public facilities and housing rehabilitation. Since 2009, Franklin
County has received fifty-one CDAP grants totaling $12,606,702 and were used for various hazard
mitigation projects.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 5. Mitigation Strategies Page 73
Of the fifty-three CDAP grants, one grant was an emergency public infrastructure grant that was used to
replace an 18" sewer main that collapsed in March, 2012 and three grants were used to install storm
warning systems. Twenty-three of the CDAP projects were to improve water, sanitary and storm-sewer
systems. The remaining twenty-five grants were used to rehabilitate homes for low income families or
housing units occupied by persons with mobility impairments.
Emergency Solutions Grant The Illinois Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) program provides funding to: (1) engage homeless
individuals and families living on the street; (2) improve the number and quality of emergency shelters for
homeless individuals and families; (3) help operate these shelters; (4) provide essential services to shelter
residents, (5) rapidly re-house homeless individuals and families, and (6) prevent families and individuals
from becoming homeless. Since 2009, Franklin County received three ESG grants totaling $89,402 to aid
in shelter/services in Franklin County, including essential services and operations.
Grant Management Program The Illinois Grant Management Program provides grants to specific local governments, units of
government, educational facilities and not-for-profit organizations by members of the General Assembly
and the Governor for specific purposes to bolster the State's economy, promote a clean environment and
improve the overall quality of life throughout the State of Illinois. Since 2009, Franklin County received
nine grants under the Grant Management Program totaling $1,469,255. The following communities
utilized the Grant Management Program funds to complete hazard mitigation projects:
The City of Benton used grant funds for all costs associated with sewer main replacement located
between Iowa St and North Du Quoin Street, which travels underneath Interstate 57 and ends at the
sewage treatment plant off of Petroff Road.
The City of Christopher used grants funded for renovation of the Grantee's water tower, located near
the corner of West Sylvia Avenue and North Jesse Street in Christopher.
The Village of Royalton or a combination of municipal improvement projects involving the demolition
of an existing vacant school building; the replacement of a large culvert; and the purchase of a dump
truck for the Village.
The City of Sesser used the grant funds for a municipal project involving improvements to the City’s
sanitary sewer system.
The City of Zeigler used the grant funds for installing a new chlorination system at the Water
Treatment Plant and installation of a lift station and hookups for Larry's Trailer Sales.
5.1.2 National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) In 1968, Congress created the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) to help provide a means for
property owners to financially protect themselves. The NFIP offers flood insurance to homeowners,
renters, and business owners if their community participates in the NFIP. Participating communities agree
to adopt and enforce ordinances that meet or exceed FEMA requirements to reduce the risk of flooding.
This section covers the County’s NIFP status, flood insurance policy and claim statistics, repetitive loss
structures, and Community Rating System status.
NFIP Status In Franklin County, three out of the thirteen listed communities participate in the NFIP. Table 5-1 includes
a summary of information for Franklin County participation in the NFIP. Three communities in Franklin
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 5. Mitigation Strategies Page 74
County are mapped with a flood risk but were sanctioned: Buckner on August 19, 1985; North City on
November 18, 2010; Orient on April 4, 1976. Sanctioned communities do not qualify for flood-related
Federal disaster assistance for acquisition, construction, or reconstruction purposes in Special Flood
Hazard Areas. This may have serious consequences for the community’s real estate market and economic
viability, as each federally regulated lender must notify the purchaser or lessee that Federal disaster
assistance is not available for that property in the event of a flood. Franklin County will continue to provide
information to its non-participating jurisdictions regarding the benefits of the National Flood Insurance
Program.
Two communities, Hanaford and Sesser, have an effective FIRMs and participates in the NFIP. However,
these communities are mapped as Non-Special Flood Hazard Areas (NSFHA). NSFHA areas have a
moderate-to-low risk flood zone and is not in any immediate danger from flooding caused by overflowing
rivers or hard rains. However, it’s important to note that structures within a NSFHA are still at risk. In fact,
nearly 1 in 4 NFIP flood claims occur in these moderate- to low-risk areas.
Table 5-1. Information on Franklin County’s Participation in the NFIP
Community Participate in the
NFIP
Initial Flood Hazard Boundary Map
Identified Initial FIRM Identified
Current Effective FIRM Date
Franklin County Yes 01/13/78 11/18/09 11/18/09
Benton Yes 06/28/74 12/14/79 11/18/09(M)
Buckner No 03/22/74 08/19/85 11/18/09
Christopher Yes 03/29/74 08/19/87 11/18/09(M)
Freeman Spur Yes 10/20/78 08/04/08 11/18/09(M)
Hanaford Yes - 11/18/09 NSFHA
North City No - 11/18/09 11/18/09
Orient No 04/04/75 11/18/09 11/18/09
Royalton Yes 03/21/74 11/18/09 11/18/09(M)
Sesser Yes 03/21/75 11/18/09 NSFHA
Valier Yes 03/21/75 07/02/87 11/18/09(M)
West City Yes 03/28/75 11/18/09 11/18/09(M)
West Frankfort Yes 03/08/74 05/16/83 11/18/09
Zeigler Yes 02/25/77 08/05/85 11/18/09(M) NFIP status and information are documented in the Community Status Book Report updated on 06/06/2015. (M) – No Elevation Determined – All Zone A, C and X
Flood Insurance Policy and Claim Statistics As of March 2015, 119 households paid flood insurance, insuring $13,446,600 in property value. The total
premiums collected for the policies amounted to $93,316. Since the establishment of the NFIP in 1978,
53 flood insurance claims were filed in Franklin County, totaling in $413,365.94 in payments. Table 5-2
summarizes the claims since 1978.
Table 5-2. Flood Insurance Claim Statistics for Franklin County
Community Total Losses Closed Losses Open Losses CWOP Losses Payments
Franklin County 4 2 0 2 $17,324.97
Benton 4 3 0 1 $8,848.52
Christopher 1 0 0 1 $0
Freeman Spur 1 0 0 1 $0
West Frankfort 43 32 0 11 $387,192.45
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 5. Mitigation Strategies Page 75
NFIP policy and claim statistics since 1978 until the most recently updated date of 03/31/2015. Closed Losses refer to losses that are paid; open losses are losses that are not paid in full; CWOP losses are losses that are closed without payment; and total losses refers to all losses submitted regardless of status. Lastly, total payments refer to the total amount paid on losses.
Repetitive Lose Structures There are several structures in Franklin County that have experienced repetitive losses due to flooding.
FEMA defines a repetitive loss structure as a structure covered by a contract of flood insurance issued
under the NFIP that has suffered flood loss damage on two or more occasions during a 10-year period
that ends on the date of the second loss, in which the cost to repair the flood damage is ≥ 25% of the
market value of the structure at the time of each flood loss. Currently there are over 122,000 Repetitive
Loss properties nationwide.
The Illinois Emergency Management Agency and Illinois Department of Natural Resources was contacted
to determine the location of repetitive loss structures in Franklin County. Records indicate that there are
two repetitive loss structures within the county. The total amount paid for building replacement and
building contents for damage to these repetitive loss structures is $23,333.28. Table 5-3 describes the
repetitive loss structures for each jurisdiction.
Table 5-3. Repetitive Loss Structures for each Jurisdiction in Franklin County Jurisdiction Number of Properties Number of Losses Total Paid
West Frankfort 1 3 $14,484.76
West Frankfort 1 3 $8,848.52
Total: 2 6 $23,333.28
Community Rating System Status The CRS is a voluntary incentive program that recognizes and encourages community floodplain
management activities that exceed the minimum NFIP requirements. As a result, flood insurance
premium rates are discounted to reflect the reduced flood risk resulting from the community actions
meeting the three goals of the CRS: (1) reduce flood losses; (2) facilitate accurate insurance rating; and (3)
promote the awareness of flood insurance. More than 1,200 communities from all 50 states participate
in the CRS. In Illinois, 51 communities participate in the CRS. Although joining the CRS is free, completing
CRS activities and maintain a CRS rating will require a degree of commitment from the community,
including dedicating staff. Franklin County does not have any communities that participate in the CRS
Program.
5.1.3 Jurisdiction Ordinances Hazard Mitigation related ordinances, such as zoning, burning, or building codes, have the potential to
reduce the risk from known hazards. These types of regulations provide many effective ways to address
resiliency to known hazards. Table 5-5 list Franklin County’s current ordinances that directly pertain, or
can pertain, to hazard mitigation. It is important to evaluate the local building codes and ordinances to
determine if they have the ability to reduce potential damages caused by future hazards. The Franklin
County Planning Team worked to identify gaps in the current list of ordinances and suggested
changes/additions in Section 5.3.
Table 5-4: Franklin County Jurisdictional Ordinances
Community Comp Plan Zoning
Ord Subd
Control Ord Erosion Control
Storm Water Mgmt Burning Ord
Seismic Ord
Bldg Standards
Franklin Co. 03/1965 N/A 04/2008 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Benton 03/1979 09/1965 05/1972 N/A 05/1972 10/1988 N/A 01/1969
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 5. Mitigation Strategies Page 76
Community Comp Plan Zoning
Ord Subd
Control Ord Erosion Control
Storm Water Mgmt Burning Ord
Seismic Ord
Bldg Standards
Buckner N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Christopher 07/1964 12/1966 N/A N/A N/A 10/1992 N/A 05/1963
Ewing 07/1967 N/A N/A N/A N/A 05/2001 N/A N/A
Freeman Spur N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2005 N/A 2005
Hanford N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Macedonia N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
North City N/A 1986 N/A N/A N/A 1986 N/A 1986
Orient 08/1968 N/A N/A N/A N/A 03/1998 N/A N/A
Rend Lake Conservancy Dist
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
Royalton 07/1964 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 03/2007
Sesser 07/1964 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Thompsonville N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Valier 05/1968 10/1973 N/A N/A N/A 08/1993 N/A N/A
West City 07/1964 10/1970 N/A N/A N/A 11/1990 N/A 2003
Frankfort 01/1961 1962 1992 N/A 1992 1972 N/A 1992
Zeigler 07/1964 12/1972 12/1972 N/A N/A 11/1986 N/A 12/1972
The adoption of new ordinances, including the adoption of new development standards or the creation
of hazard-specific overlay zones tied to existing zoning regulations, present opportunities to discourage
hazardous construction and manage the type and density of land uses in areas of known natural hazards.
Adopting and enforcing higher regulatory standards for floodplain management (i.e., those that go
beyond the minimum standards of the NFIP) is another effective method for minimizing future flood
losses, particularly if a community is experiencing growth and development patterns that influence flood
hazards in ways that are not accounted for on existing regulatory floodplain maps. Revisions to existing
building codes also present the opportunity to address safe growth. Many state and local codes are based
off national or industry standard codes which undergo routine evaluations and updates. The adoption of
revised code requirements and optional hazard-specific standards may help increase community
resilience.
5.1.4 Fire Insurance Ratings By classifying communities' ability to suppress fires, the Insurance Service Office (ISO) Public Protection
Classification Program helps communities evaluate their public fire-protection services. The program
provides a countrywide standard that helps fire departments in planning and budgeting for facilities,
equipment, and training. Information is collected on municipal fire-protection efforts in communities
throughout the United States. In each of those communities, ISO analyzes the relevant data using a Fire
Suppression Rating Schedule. Rating are assigned from 1 to 10 where Class 1 generally represents superior
property fire protection, and Class 10 indicates that the area's fire-suppression program doesn't meet
ISO’s minimum criteria. Table 5-6 displays each Fire Department’s insurance rating and total number of
employees.
Table 5-5: Franklin County Fire Departments, Insurance Ratings, and Number of Employees/Volunteers
Fire Department Fire Insurance Rating Number of Employees Benton Fire Department ISO 4 23 Buckner Fire Department ISO 7 30 Cave Eastern FPD Station 1 ISO 7 N/A Cave Eastern FPD Station 2 ISO 7 23 Christopher Fire Department ISO 6 24 Coello Fire Department ISO 7 20
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 5. Mitigation Strategies Page 77
Ewing-Northern FPD Station 1 ISO 7 11 Ewing-Northern FPD Station 3 ISO 7 10 Royalton Fire Department ISO 6 15 Sesser FDP Station 1 ISO 4/8 26 Valier Fire Department ISO 6/9 18 West City Fire Department ISO 5/8 13 West Frankfort Fire department ISO 4 20 Zeigler Fire Department ISO 4 20
5.2 Mit igat ion Goals In Section 4 of this plan, the risk assessment identified Franklin County as prone to several hazards. The
Planning Team members understand that although they cannot eliminate hazards altogether, Franklin
County can work towards building disaster-resistant communities. Below is a generalized list of goals,
objectives, and actions. The goals represent long-term, broad visions of the overall vision the county
would like to achieve for mitigation. The objectives are strategies and steps that will assist the
communities in attaining the listed goals.
Goal 1: Lessen the impacts of hazards to new and existing infrastructure Objective: Retrofit critical facilities and structures with structural design practices and
equipment that will withstand natural disasters and offer weather-proofing. Objective: Equip public facilities and communities to guard against damage caused by
secondary effects of hazards. Objective: Minimize the amount of infrastructure exposed to hazards. Objective: Evaluate and strengthen the communication and transportation abilities of
emergency services throughout the county. Objective: Improve emergency sheltering in Franklin County.
Goal 2: Create new or revise existing plans/maps for Franklin County Objective: Support compliance with the NFIP for each jurisdiction in Franklin County. Objective: Review and update existing, or create new, community plans and ordinances
to support hazard mitigation. Objective: Conduct new studies/research to profile hazards and follow up with mitigation
strategies. Goal 3: Develop long-term strategies to educate Franklin County residents on the hazards
Objective: Raise public awareness on hazard mitigation. Objective: Improve education and training of emergency personnel and public officials.
5.3 Mult i - Jur isd ict ional Mit igat ion Strateg ies After reviewing the Risk Assessment, the Mitigation Planning Team was presented with the task of
individually listing potential mitigation activities using the FEMA STAPLEE evaluation criteria (see table 5-
7). FEMA uses their evaluation criteria STAPLEE (stands for social, technical, administrative, political, legal,
economic and environmental) to assess the developed mitigation strategies. Evaluating possible natural
hazard mitigation activities provides decision-makers with an understanding of the potential benefits and
costs of an activity, as well as a basis upon which to compare alternative projects. The Planning Team
brought their mitigation ideas to Meeting 3.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 5. Mitigation Strategies Page 78
Table 5-7. FEMA’s STAPLEE Evaluation Criteria
Social
Mitigation actions are acceptable to the community if they do not adversely affect a particular segment of the population, do not cause relocation of lower income people, and if they are compatible with the community’s social and cultural values.
Technical Mitigation actions are technically most effective if they provide a long-term reduction of losses and have minimal secondary adverse impacts.
Administrative Mitigation actions are easier to implement if the jurisdiction has the necessary staffing and funding.
Political Mitigation actions can truly be successful if all stakeholders have been offered an opportunity to participate in the planning process and if there is public support for the action.
Legal It is critical that the jurisdiction or implementing agency have the legal authority to implement and enforce a mitigation action.
Economic
Budget constraints can significantly deter the implementation of mitigation actions. Hence, it is important to evaluate whether an action is cost-effective, as determined by a cost benefit review, and possible to fund.
Environmental
Sustainable mitigation actions that do not have an adverse effect on the environment, comply with federal, state, and local environmental regulations, and are consistent with the community’s environmental goals, have mitigation benefits while being environmentally sound.
Table 5-8 contains a comprehensive range of specific mitigation actions and projects for each jurisdiction,
with an emphasis on new and existing buildings and infrastructure. At least two identifiable mitigation
action items have been addressed for each hazard listed in the risk assessment. Each of the incorporated
communities within and including Franklin County was invited to participate in brainstorming sessions in
which goals, objectives, and strategies were discussed and prioritized. Each participant in these sessions
was armed with possible mitigation goals and strategies provided by FEMA, as well as information about
mitigation projects discussed in neighboring communities and counties.
All potential strategies and goals that arose through this process are included in Table 5-8. The mitigation strategies are arranged by hazard they directly address. In some cases, certain mitigation strategies can address all hazards. If provided by the jurisdiction, each mitigation strategy contains specific details pertaining to the implementation, responsible and/or organizing agency, and potential funding source. Potential funding sources are identified by Federal, State, Local, or Private. A code is assigned to each mitigations strategy for ease of reference when reviewing the prioritization of each mitigations strategies in Section 5.4
FRANKLIN County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan September 28, 2016
Section 5. Mitigation Strategies Page 79
Table 5-6: Franklin County Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Strategies
Code Mitigation Strategy Jurisdictions Involved Status
Funding
Source*
Responsible
Organization or Agency
ALL HAZARDS
AH1
Promote Disaster Resilience Through Workshops, Education Materials, and Planning Guides Various agencies have implemented forms of this strategy. Local resources have been used to target and inform the resident population. Pandemic education and outreach was conducted the year prior to the 2009 H1N1 pandemic and continued heavily throughout the response by Franklin-Williamson Bi-County Health Dept. (FWBCHD). Education and outreach continues by FWBCHD and various community partners. Local, state and federal sources have been used in past and current pandemic and other disaster education. Additional funding will be sought from local, state and federal sources.
All Ongoing L, S, F
Franklin-Williamson Bi-
County Health Dept.,
Franklin County EMA,
Schools
AH2 Continue liaison groups that meet regularly to discuss hazard mitigation
These groups meet on a regular basis to discuss hazard mitigation. Local funding will be used to continue these groups which help prepare Franklin Hospital for a hazard.
Franklin Hospital Ongoing L LEPC, SPARC, Franklin
Hospital
AH3 Establish local emergency planning committee
LEPC meets on quarterly basis to incorporate all organizations in hazard planning. Local funding will be used to organize these groups which help prepare Franklin Hospital for a hazard.
Franklin County Ongoing L LEPC
AH4 Enhance emergency communication system infrastructure
RLCD will seek funding to improve communications between pump stations and the control room at the plant. This communication has been frequently disrupted during severe weather.
RLCD Proposed L, S, F RLCD
AH5 Warning system expansions
Plan and construct additional locations of public warning and information. Outdoor warning stations and information locations
Franklin County Proposed L, S, F Franklin County EMA
AH6 Improve Emergency Response Training, staff, resources, and equipment
Franklin County EMA and other jurisdictions will oversee the implementation of this plan. If appropriate funding is found, training will begin within two years.
RLCD, Franklin County EMA,
Franklin Hospital Proposed L, S, F
RLCD, Franklin County
EMA, Franklin Hospital,
LEPC, SPARC, state, and
private agencies
AH7
Develop a Vulnerable Population List Franklin County does not have a comprehensive vulnerable population list, which was deemed too labor-intensive to compile and to keep updated. The Franklin-Williamson Bi-County Health Dept. (FWBCHD) has a list of resources identified within the community that may be helpful in addressing functional/access needs. FWBCHD shall explore the vulnerable population list project underway with the Disaster Risk Reduction Steering Committee in Jackson County with assistance from Southern Illinois University.
Franklin-Williamson Bi-County
Health Dept. Ongoing L
Franklin-Williamson Bi-
County Health Dept.
AH8 City Hall/ Police Department update
City of Sesser will seek funding to update City Hall which houses the PD and unified command center. Facility will have a community safe room, well equipped emergency operations center, and new tornado sirens.
City of Sesser Proposed L, S, F City of Sesser
AH9
Mulkeytown water tower Mulkeytown will seek funding to replace old tower which is unable to hold the recommended 3 days’ worth of water. The community is unable to maintain and keep up the existing 40 year old tower. The new, larger water tower will better serve the community. Funding will mainly be sought from outside sources.
Mulkeytown Water District,
Franklin County Proposed L, S, F
Mulkeytown Water
District, Franklin County
EMA
AH10
Secure Critical Infrastructure City of Sesser will seek funding to improve critical facilities including the outdated sewer system, inadequate police station, and City Hall. The county will also seek funding to improve structures elsewhere. This may include infrastructure located above and below ground.
Franklin County, City of Sesser,
USDA, DCEO Proposed L, S, F
Franklin County EMA, City
of Sesser, USDA, DCEO
FRANKLIN County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan September 28, 2016
Section 5. Mitigation Strategies Page 80
Code Mitigation Strategy Jurisdictions Involved Status
Funding
Source*
Responsible
Organization or Agency
AH11
Retrofit/Harden Critical Facilities and Utilities The Franklin-Williamson Bi-County Health Dept. (FWBCHD) will seek federal funding to harden the FWBCHD building. Franklin Hospital will procure federal funding to sustain or harden critical building infrastructure of hospital. Sesser will harden the Public Works Facility. SIH would like to retrofit existing facilities to serve surge healthcare needs in the event of mass casualties. Funding has not been secured as of 2015. Implementation, if funding is available from PDM or HMGP, is forecasted to be initiated within approximately one year. Franklin County will seek to harden critical government facilities.
All Proposed L, S, F
Franklin-Williamson Bi-
County Health Dept., LEPC,
and Hospital, Franklin
County EMA
AH12
Equip critical facilities with back-up generators RLCD will seek funding for a back-up generator for the water and sewer plant and a portable back-up generator to be shared between pump stations. Thompsonville CUSD will seek funding to equip each building with a back-up generator. Franklin Hospital will obtain needed generators and fuel to sustain the facility. Franklin County will seek to obtain generators and fuel to sustain facilities.
RLCD, Thompsonville CUSD #174,
Franklin Hospital, Franklin County Proposed L, S, F
RLCD, Thompsonville CUSD
#174, Franklin Hospital
AH13
Supply all critical facilities with basic survival gear, food, and water. Thompsonville CUSD will seek funding to replace some items in emergency backpacks distributed throughout the school in the classrooms. Franklin Hospital will seek funding to have adequate supplies for employees and patients.
Rend Lake College, Thompsonville
CUSD #174, Franklin Hospital,
Franklin County
Proposed F
Rend Lake College,
Thompsonville CUSD #174
Franklin Hospital, Franklin
County EMA
AH14 Construct bypass water main around swamps, rivers, and interstate
RLCD will seek funding to build a water main bypass to allow better access for repairs in emergency situations. The current location of the water main has limited access.
RLCD Ongoing L, S, F RLCD
AH15 Stockpile and create an inventory of emergency parts and pipe to respond to sudden failures
RLCD will seek funding to establish a stockpile of parts along with a mutual aid agreement to supply emergency parts and pipe for sudden and high priority failures.
RLCD, all local communities, and
Water District Proposed L, S, F RLCD
AH16 Develop mutual aid agreements
Franklin Hospital will seek funding to maintain existing and add new mutual aid agreements between various public and private entities to be used in disasters.
Franklin Hospital Ongoing L, S, F, P LEPC, private and public
entities, and hospital
AH17 Identify and procure backup water supply
Ensure water supply for laboratory equipment and facility public usage by mutual aid agreements Franklin Hospital Ongoing L, S, P LEPC and hospital
TORNADO / SEVERE THUNDERSTROMS
ST1 Install lightning detection system
RLCD will seek funding for and oversee the installation of lightning detection systems to better monitor severe weather.
RLCD Proposed L, S, F RLCD
ST2 Require the construction of safe rooms within new public buildings
Rend Lake College will seek funding to enact a requirement for new buildings to have safe rooms. Rend Lake College Proposed F Rend Lake College
ST3
Construct new safe rooms The County EMA will oversee the implementation of this project. The Franklin-Williamson Bi-County Health Dept. (FWBCHD) will seek federal funding to install a tornado safe room in the FWBCHD building. Rend Lake College would like to use funding for the creation of shelters. Local resources will be used to evaluate the cost benefit of the shelters and define specific locations. Funding has not been secured as of 2015. Implementation, if HMA funding is available, is forecasted to be initiated within approximately 3-5 years. Rend Lake College and Benton CHSD #103 will each seek funding to construct new safe rooms in their buildings for the protection of their students.
Rend Lake College, Benton CHSD
#103, Franklin County Proposed L, S, F
Rend Lake College, Benton
CHSD #103, Franklin
County EMA, Franklin-
Williamson Bi-County
Health Dept.
ST4 Equip critical facilities with lightning protection devices
RLCD will seek funding for and oversee the installation of lightning protection devices on critical facilities. RLCD Proposed L, S, F RLCD
FRANKLIN County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan September 28, 2016
Section 5. Mitigation Strategies Page 81
Code Mitigation Strategy Jurisdictions Involved Status
Funding
Source*
Responsible
Organization or Agency
ST5 Retrofit structures to withstand high winds
Benton CHSD #103 will oversee the implementation of this project. Funding has not been secured as of 2015. Implementation, if HMA funding is available, is forecasted to be initiated within approximately 3-5 years.
Benton CHSD #103 Proposed F Benton CHSD #103
FLOODING / DAM AND LEVEE FAILURE
F1
Institute a buy-out plan for repetitive loss properties RLCD and Franklin County will oversee the implementation of various projects. Funding has not been secured as of 2015. Implementation, if HMA funding is available, is forecasted to be initiated within approximately 3-5 years.
RLCD, Franklin County Proposed L, S, F RLCD, Franklin County
EMA
F2 Regularly perform drainage system maintenance
Rend Lake College will oversee the implementation of this project. Funding has not been secured as of 2015. Implementation, if HMA funding is available, is forecasted to be initiated within approximately 3-5 years.
Rend Lake College Proposed S Rend Lake College
F3
Culvert replacement Benton CHSD #103, City of Benton, City of West Frankfurt, and Rend Lake College will oversee the implementation of this project. Funding has not been secured as of 2015. Implementation, if HMA funding is available, is forecasted to be initiated within approximately 3-5 years.
Rend Lake College, Benton CHSD
#103, City of Benton Proposed S, F
Rend Lake College, Benton
CHSD #103, City of Benton,
City of West Frankfurt
F4
Increase capacity of storm water infrastructure RLCD will seek funding to improve the frequently overwhelmed sewer plant to be better able to handle major rains and flooding. City of Benton and City of West Frankfurt will seek funding to improve storm water management.
RLCD, City of Benton, City of West
Frankfurt Proposed L, S, F
RLCD, City of Benton, City
of West Frankfurt
WINTER STORMS
WS1 Purchase deicing chemicals
Rend Lake College will oversee the implementation of this project. Funding has not been secured as of 2015. Implementation, if HMA funding is available, is forecasted to be initiated within approximately 1-2 years.
Rend Lake College Proposed S Rend Lake College
WS2 Purchase snow fences
Rend Lake College will oversee the implementation of this project. Funding has not been secured as of 2015. Implementation, if HMA funding is available, is forecasted to be initiated within approximately 3-5 years.
Rend Lake College Proposed S Rend Lake College
EARTHQUAKES
EQ1 Provide information to residents on structural and non-structural retrofitting
Rend Lake College will oversee the implementation of this project. Funding has not been secured as of 2015. Implementation, if HMA funding is available, is forecasted to be initiated within approximately 3-5 years.
Rend Lake College Proposed F Rend Lake College
EQ2 Develop earthquake emergency action plan
Rend Lake College will oversee the implementation of this project. Funding has not been secured as of 2015. Implementation, if HMA funding is available, is forecasted to be initiated within approximately 3-5 years.
Rend Lake College Proposed S Rend Lake College
EQ3 Construct new safe rooms
RLCD will seek funding for and oversee the construction of earthquake-ready safe rooms RLCD Proposed L, S, F RLCD
EQ4
Install Automatic Shutoff Valves The Franklin-Williamson Bi-County Health Dept. (FWBCHD) will seek federal funding to install automatic shutoff valves in the FWBCHD buildings. RLCD will seek funding to install shutoff valves elsewhere in the county.
Franklin-Williamson Bi-County
Health Dept., RLCD Proposed L, S, F
Franklin-Williamson Bi-
County Health Dept., RLCD
EQ5 Install 2nd water main from Plant to distribution system
RLCD will seek funding to construct an additional water main to serve communities to mitigate loss in the event an earthquake disrupts the current main lying under I-57.
RLCD Proposed L, S, F RLCD
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RELEASE
FRANKLIN County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan September 28, 2016
Section 5. Mitigation Strategies Page 82
Code Mitigation Strategy Jurisdictions Involved Status
Funding
Source*
Responsible
Organization or Agency
HAZ1 Acquire protective gear
Rend Lake College will oversee the implementation of this project. Funding has not been secured as of 2015. Implementation, if HMA funding is available, is forecasted to be initiated within approximately 3-5 years.
Rend Lake College Proposed S Rend Lake College
HAZ2 Develop hazmat emergency response
Rend Lake College will oversee the implementation of this project. Funding has not been secured as of 2015. Implementation, if HMA funding is available, is forecasted to be initiated within approximately 3-5 years.
Rend Lake College Ongoing S Rend Lake College
HAZ3 Equip critical facilities with centralized positive-pressure HVAC systems
RLCD will oversee the implementation of this project. Funding has not been secured as of 2015. Implementation, if HMA funding is available, is forecasted to be initiated within approximately 3-5 years.
RLCD Proposed L, S, F RLCD
DROUGHT / EXTREME HEAT
H1 Reduce urban heat island effect
Rend Lake College will oversee the implementation of this project. Funding has not been secured as of 2015. Implementation, if HMA funding is available, is forecasted to be initiated within approximately 3-5 years.
Rend Lake College Proposed P Rend Lake College
H2 Retrofit water supply systems
RLCD will oversee the implementation of this project. Funding has not been secured as of 2015. Implementation, if HMA funding is available, is forecasted to be initiated within approximately 3-5 years.
RLCD Proposed L, S, F RLCD
H3 Establish fire/landslide/erosion preventative vegetation management techniques
Rend Lake College will oversee the implementation of this project. Funding has not been secured as of 2015. Implementation, if HMA funding is available, is forecasted to be initiated within approximately 3-5 years.
Rend Lake College Proposed P Rend Lake College
GROUND FAILURE
GF1 Maintain a list of buildings constructed over underground mines
Rend Lake College will oversee the implementation of this project. Funding has not been secured as of 2015. Implementation, if HMA funding is available, is forecasted to be initiated within approximately 3-5 years.
Rend Lake College Proposed S Rend Lake College
GF2 Develop/improve mining regulations
Rend Lake College will oversee the implementation of this project. Funding has not been secured as of 2015. Implementation, if HMA funding is available, is forecasted to be initiated within approximately 3-5 years.
Rend Lake College Proposed S Rend Lake College
DISEASE EPIDEMICS / PANDEMICS
DEP1 Enhance pandemic surveillance reporting systems (schools and sentinel computers, etc.) County Health Department and Hospitals will oversee implementation of this project. Will seek local, state, and federal funding for project.
Franklin County Proposed L, S, F Franklin County
DEP2 Continue non-pharmaceutical intervention program County Health Department and Hospitals will oversee implementation of this project. Will seek local, state, and federal funding for project.
Franklin County Ongoing L, S, F Franklin County
DEP3 Build a robust strategic stockpile County Health Department and Hospitals will oversee implementation of this project. Will seek local, state, and federal funding for project.
Franklin County Proposed L, S, F Franklin County
DEP4
Develop plan for local healthcare mass care situations FWBCHD is currently working with American Red Cross to enhance mass care capability through MRC volunteer shelter support. FWBCHD is also leading the region in developing a Mass Fatality Family Assistance Center plan and has secured equipment which should reduce surge to hospitals and coroner’s offices and lessen the burden by other community response agencies. County Health Department and Hospitals will oversee implementation of this project. Will seek local and state for project.
Franklin County Proposed L, S, F Franklin County
FRANKLIN County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan September 28, 2016
Section 5. Mitigation Strategies Page 83
Code Mitigation Strategy Jurisdictions Involved Status
Funding
Source*
Responsible
Organization or Agency
DEP5
Portable morgue and mutual aid agreement and response plan County Coroner has a portable morgue and access to trailer in the event of mass casualties. Mutual aid agreements with surrounding counties and internal departments. Coroner has a 7-year-old response plan but it has been updated twice.
Franklin County Proposed L Franklin County
DEP6 Educate Community on Pandemics and How to Mitigation their Impacts Potential funding sources includes: Illinois Department of Public Health, U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, and various Private foundations
Franklin County Ongoing S, F Franklin-Williamson Bi-
County Health Dept.
DEP7 Purchase technical assistance and develop website to enhance medical countermeasure capability Potential
funding sources includes: Illinois Department of Public Health, U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, and various Private foundations
Franklin County Proposed S, F, P Franklin-Williamson Bi-
County Health Dept.
*F – Federal, S – State, L – Local, P – Private
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 5. Mitigation Strategies Page 84
5.4 Pr ior i t i zat ion of Mult i - Jur isd ict ional Mit igat ion Strateg ies Implementation of the mitigation strategies is critical to the overall success of the mitigation plan. It is important to decide, based upon many factors, which action will be undertaken first. In order to pursue the top priority first, an analysis and prioritization of the actions is vital. It is important to note that some actions may occur before the top priority due to financial, engineering, environmental, permitting, and site control issues. Public awareness and input of these mitigation actions can increase knowledge to capitalize on funding opportunities and monitoring the progress of an action. It is also critical to take into account the amount of time it will take the community to complete the mitigation project. Table 5-9 displays the priority ranking for each mitigation strategy. Each code refers to a specific
mitigations strategy listed in Table 5-8. For each participating jurisdiction a rating (high, medium, or low)
was assessed for each mitigation item. The ranking is the result of the STAPLEE evaluation and the
timeframe the community is interested in completing the strategy: H - High 1-3 years; M - Medium 3-5
years; and L - Low 5+years
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 5. Mitigation Strategies Page 85
Table 5-9. Prioritization of the Franklin County Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Strategies
Code
Priority Ranking*
Fran
klin
Co
un
ty
Be
nto
n
Bu
ckn
er
Ch
rist
op
he
r
Ewin
g
Fre
em
an S
pu
r
Han
afo
rd
Mac
ed
on
ia
Mu
lke
yto
wn
No
rth
Cit
y
Ori
en
t
Ro
yalt
on
Sess
er
Tho
mp
son
ville
Val
ier
We
st C
ity
We
st F
ran
kfo
rt
Zeig
ler
Fran
klin
Ho
spit
al
Sou
the
rn Il
lino
is H
ea
lth
care
Re
nd
Lak
e C
on
serv
ancy
Dis
t.
Re
nd
Lak
e C
olle
ge
Joh
n A
. Lo
gan
Co
llege
Aki
n C
CSD
#9
1
Be
nto
n C
CSD
#4
7
Be
nto
n C
HSD
#1
03
Ch
rist
op
he
r C
USD
#9
9
Ewin
g N
ort
he
rn C
CSD
#1
15
Fran
kfo
rt C
USD
#1
68
Sess
er-
Va
lier
CU
SD #
16
8
Tho
mp
son
ville
CU
SD #
17
4
Zeig
ler-
Ro
yalt
on
CU
SD #
18
8
AH1 H H - AH2(5) H - AH3(6) H - AH4(8) M
AH5 M - AH6(11) H M AH7(15) M -
AH8 H - AH9 M -
AH10 H H - AH11 H H -
AH12(25)
M H M H
AH13(28)
H - H H
AH14 H AH15 H AH16 H AH17 H ST1(1) L ST2(3) - H ST3(4) M H - H ST4(5) L ST5(6) H - F1(11) L
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 5. Mitigation Strategies Page 86
Code
Priority Ranking*
Fran
klin
Co
un
ty
Be
nto
n
Bu
ckn
er
Ch
rist
op
he
r
Ewin
g
Fre
em
an S
pu
r
Han
afo
rd
Mac
ed
on
ia
Mu
lke
yto
wn
No
rth
Cit
y
Ori
en
t
Ro
yalt
on
Sess
er
Tho
mp
son
ville
Val
ier
We
st C
ity
We
st F
ran
kfo
rt
Zeig
ler
Fran
klin
Ho
spit
al
Sou
the
rn Il
lino
is H
ea
lth
care
Re
nd
Lak
e C
on
serv
ancy
Dis
t.
Re
nd
Lak
e C
olle
ge
Joh
n A
. Lo
gan
Co
llege
Aki
n C
CSD
#9
1
Be
nto
n C
CSD
#4
7
Be
nto
n C
HSD
#1
03
Ch
rist
op
he
r C
USD
#9
9
Ewin
g N
ort
he
rn C
CSD
#1
15
Fran
kfo
rt C
USD
#1
68
Sess
er-
Va
lier
CU
SD #
16
8
Tho
mp
son
ville
CU
SD #
17
4
Zeig
ler-
Ro
yalt
on
CU
SD #
18
8
F2(23) - M F3(24) H - M
F4 H WS1(2) - H WS2(3) - L EQ1(2) - H
EQ2(10) - H EQ3(4) L EQ4(6) H L
EQ5 H HAZ1(5) - H HAZ2(1) - M HAZ3(4) L
H1(4) - L H2(5) - H3(7) - L H4(8) - L H5(9) M L
GF1(2) - H GF2(6) - H DEP1 -
*Ranking based on STAPLEE evaluation and estimated timeframe: H – High (1-2 years), M – Medium (3-5 years), and L – Low (5+ years)
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 6. Plan Maintenance Page 87
Section 6. Plan Implementation and Maintenance
6.1 Implementat ion through Exist ing Programs Throughout the planning process, the Franklin County Planning Team worked to identify existing hazard
mitigation policies, develop mitigation goals, and a create a comprehensive range of mitigation strategies
specific to each jurisdiction. This work provides a blueprint for reducing the potential loses identified in
the Risk Assessment (Section 4). The ultimate goal of this plan is to incorporate the mitigation strategies
proposed into ongoing planning efforts within the County. The Franklin County Emergency Management
Agency will be the local champion for the mitigation actions. The Franklin County Board and the city and
village councils will be an integral part of the implementation process. Federal and state assistance will
be necessary for a number of the identified action.
Continued public involvement is also critical to the successful implementation of the MHMP. Comments
from the public on the MHMP will be received by the Franklin County Emergency Management Agency
and forwarded to the Planning Team for discussion. Education efforts for hazard mitigation will be an
ongoing effort of Franklin County. The public will be notified of periodic planning meetings through
notices in the local newspaper. Once adopted, a copy of the MHMP will be maintained in each jurisdiction
and in the Franklin County Emergency Management Agency.
6.2 Monitor ing , Eva luat ion, and Updat ing the MHMP Throughout the five-year planning cycle, the Franklin County Emergency Management Agency will
reconvene the Planning Team to monitor, evaluate, and update the plan on an annual basis. Additionally,
a meeting will be held in 2020 to address the five-year update of this plan. Members of the planning
committee are readily available to engage in email correspondence between annual meetings. If the need
for a special meeting, due to new developments or the occurrence of a declared disaster in the county,
the team will meet to update mitigation strategies. Depending on grant opportunities and fiscal
resources, mitigation projects may be implemented independently by individual communities or through
local partnerships.
As part of the update process, the Planning Team will review the county goals and objectives to determine
their relevance to changing situations in the county. In addition, state and federal policies will be reviewed
to ensure they are addressing current and expected conditions. The team will also review the risk
assessment portion of the plan to determine if this information should be updated or modified. The plan
revision will also reflect changes in local development and its relation to each hazard. The parties
responsible for the various implementation actions will report on the status of their projects, and will
include which implementation processes worked well, any difficulties encountered, how coordination
efforts are proceeding, and which strategies should be revised.
Updates or modifications to the MHMP during the five-year planning process will require a public notice
and a meeting prior to submitting revisions to the individual jurisdictions for approval. The plan will be
updated via written changes, submissions as the committee deems appropriate and necessary, and as
approved by the Franklin County Board.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 6. Plan Maintenance Page 88
The GIS data used to prepare the plan was obtained from existing county GIS data as well as data collected as part of the planning process. This updated Hazus-MH GIS data has been returned to the county for use and maintenance in the county’s system. As newer data becomes available, these updated data will be used for future risk assessments and vulnerability analyses.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Definitions Page 89
Definitions
100-year Floodplain Areas subject to inundation by the 1-percent-annual-chance flood event.
Critical Facility A structure, because of its function, size, service area, or uniqueness, that has the potential to cause serious bodily harm, extensive property damage, or disruption of vital socioeconomic activities if it is destroyed or damaged or if its functionality is impaired. This includes, but are not limited to, water and wastewater treatment facilities, municipal buildings, educations facilities, and non-emergency healthcare facilities.
Community Rating System (CRS) A voluntary program for National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) participating communities. The goals of the CRS are to reduce flood damages to insurable property, strengthen and support the insurance aspects of the NFIP, and encourage a comprehensive approach to floodplain management.
Comprehensive Plan A document, also known as a "general plan," covering the entire geographic area of a community and expressing community goals and objectives. The plan lays out the vision, policies, and strategies for the future of the community, including all the physical elements that will determine the community’s future developments.
Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000)
The largest legislation to improve the planning process. It was signed into law on October 30, 2000. This new legislation reinforces the importance of mitigation planning and emphasizes planning for disasters before they occur.
Critical Facility A subset of essential facilities that represent a substantial hazard to human life in the event of failure. This includes (but not limited to) hospital and fire, rescue, ambulance, emergency operations centers, and police stations.
Federal Emergency Management Agency
An independent agency created in 1979 to provide a single point of accountability for all federal activities related to disaster mitigation and emergency preparedness, response, and recovery.
Hazard A source of potential danger or adverse condition.
Hazard Mitigation Any sustained action to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to human life and property from hazards.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Definitions Page 90
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMPG)
Authorized under Section 404 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, HMGP is administered by FEMA and provides grants to states, tribes, and local governments to implement hazard mitigation actions after a major disaster declaration.
Hazus-MH A geographic information system (GIS)-based disaster risk assessment tool.
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Planning
Identify policies and actions that can be implemented over the long term to reduce risk and future losses from various hazardous events.
National Flood Insurance Program
Administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which works closely with nearly 90 private insurance companies to offer flood insurance to property owners and renters. In order to qualify for flood insurance, a community must join the NFIP and agree to enforce sound floodplain management standards.
Planning Team A group composed of government, private sector, and individuals with a variety of skills and areas of expertise, usually appointed by a city or town manager, or chief elected official. The group finds solutions to community mitigation needs and seeks community acceptance of those solutions.
Risk Priority Index Quantifies risk as the product of hazard probability and magnitude so Planning Team members can prioritize mitigation strategies for high-risk-priority hazards.
Risk Assessment Quantifies the potential loss resulting from a disaster by assessing the vulnerability of buildings, infrastructure, and people.
Strategy A collection of actions to achieve goals and objectives.
Vulnerability Describes how exposed or susceptible to damage an asset is. Vulnerability depends on an asset’s construction, contents, and the economic value of its functions.
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Acronyms Page 91
Acronyms
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
A AEGL – Acute Exposure Guideline Levels
ALOHA – Areal Locations of Hazardous Atmospheres
C CERI – Center for Earthquake Research and Information
CRS – Community Rating System
D DEM – Digital Elevation Model
DFIRM – Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map DMA – Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000
E EMA – Emergency Management Agency
EPA – Environmental Protection Agency
F FEMA – Federal Emergency Management Agency
FIRM – Flood Insurance Rate Map
G GIS – Geographic Information System
H Hazus-MH – Hazards USA Multi-Hazard
HMGP – Hazard Mitigation Grant Program HUC – Hydrologic Unit Code
I IA – Individual Assistance
IDOT – Illinois Department of Transportation IEMA – Illinois Emergency Management Agency
M MHMP – Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
N NCDC – National Climatic Data Center
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Acronyms Page 92
NEHRP – National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program NFIP – National Flood Insurance Program NOAA – National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
P PA – Public Assistance
PPM – Parts Per Million
R RPI – Risk Priority Index
S SIU – Southern Illinois University Carbondale
SPC – Storm Prediction Center
U USGS – United States Geological Survey
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendices Page 93
Appendices
Appendix A. MHMP Meeting Minutes
Appendix B. Local Press Release and Newspaper Articles
Appendix C. Adopting Resolutions
Appendix D. Historical Hazards
Appendix E. List of Essential Facilities
Appendix F. Critical Facilities
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix A: MHMP Meeting Minutes Page 94
Appendix A. MHMP Meet ing Minutes
Formal Mitigation Planning Meetings
Meeting 1 – September 2nd, 2014
Meeting 2 – December 8th, 2014
Meeting 3 – May 18th, 2015
Meeting 4 – November 17th, 2015
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix A: MHMP Meeting Minutes Page 95
Meeting 1 – September 26th, 2014
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix A: MHMP Meeting Minutes Page 96
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix A: MHMP Meeting Minutes Page 97
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix A: MHMP Meeting Minutes Page 98
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix A: MHMP Meeting Minutes Page 99
Meeting 2 – March 26th, 2015
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix A: MHMP Meeting Minutes Page 100
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix A: MHMP Meeting Minutes Page 101
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix A: MHMP Meeting Minutes Page 102
Meeting 3A – June 24th, 2015
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix A: MHMP Meeting Minutes Page 103
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix A: MHMP Meeting Minutes Page 104
Meeting 3B – July 22nd, 2015
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix A: MHMP Meeting Minutes Page 105
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix A: MHMP Meeting Minutes Page 106
Meeting 4 –
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix A: MHMP Meeting Minutes Page 107
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Appendix B: Local Newspaper Articles Page 108
Appendix B. Local Press Re lease and Newspaper Art ic les
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan September 28, 2016
Appendix B: Local Newspaper Articles Page 109
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan September 28, 2016
Appendix C: Adopting Resolutions Page 110
Appendix C. Adopt ing Resolut ions
See Attached Adopting Resolutions
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan September 28, 2016
Appendix D: Historical Hazards Page 111
Appendix D. Histor ical Hazards See Attached Large Format Map and Newspaper Clippings
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan September 28, 2016
Appendix E: List of Essential Facilities Page 112
Appendix E . L i st of Essent ia l Fac i l i t ies Not all data is available for every facility. Other facility specifics may be available upon request. Emergency Operations Center Facilities
Facility Name Address City
Franklin County Jail Facility 403 East Main Street Benton
West Frankfort Police Department 201 East Nolen Street West Frankfort
Fire Station Facilities
Facility Name Address City
Benton Fire Department 107 North Maple Street Benton
Christopher Fire Department 211 North Thomas Street Christopher
Coello Fire Department 9095 Main Street Coello
Ewing-Northern FPD Station 1 115 West Main Street Ewing
Royalton Fire Department 311 North Main Street Royalton
Sesser FDP Station 1 910 South Park Street Sesser
Valier Fire Department 217 West Main Street Valier
West Frankfort Fire department 201 East Main Street West Frankfort
Zeigler Fire Department 301 Church Street Zeigler
Cave Eastern FPD Station 2 Summer Road Akin
Buckner Fire Department 207 East Main Street Buckner
Ewing-Northern FPD Station 3 Main Street and IL 34 Steel City
West City Fire Department 1000 Blakely Street West City
Cave Eastern FPD Station 1 3504 Main Street Thompsonville
Police Station Facilities
Facility Name Address City
Christopher Police Department 208 North Thomas Street Christopher
West Frankfort Police Department 201 East Nolen Street West Frankfort
West City Police Department 201 South Browning Street West City
Valier Police Department 6 Adams Street Valier
Sesser Police Department 302 West Franklin Street Sesser
Zeigler City Police Department 303 Church Street Zeigler
Franklin County Sheriff 403 East Main Street Benton
Benton City Police Department 500 West Main Street Benton
Royalton Police Department 311 South Main Street Royalton
Ewing Police Department Village Hall Ewing
Thompsonville Police Department 21289 Division Street Thompsonville
Orient Police Department 404 South Lincoln Street Orient
Buckner Police Department 209 East Main Street Buckner
School Facilities
Facility Name Address City
Sesser-Valier High School 4626 State Highway 154 Sesser
Sesser-Valier Elementary School 4626 State Highway 154 Sesser
Sesser-Valier Junior High School 4626 State Highway 154 Sesser
Zeigler-Royalton Junior High School PO BOX 87 Zeigler
Zeigler-Royalton High School 4877 Illinois 148 Zeigler
Zeigler-Royalton Elementary School PO BOX 87 Zeigler
St. John-Baptist Catholic Elementary School 702 East Poplar Street West Frankfort
Ezra Christian School 1345 Ezra Street West Frankfort
Starquest Academy 410 West 5th Street Benton
Christopher High School 1 Bearcat Drive Christopher
Christopher Elementary School 501 South Snider Street Christopher
Benton Elementary School 1000 McKinzie Street Benton
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan September 28, 2016
Appendix E: List of Essential Facilities Page 113
Facility Name Address City
Benton Middle School 1000 Forest Street Benton
Benton Consolidated High School 511 East Main Street Benton
Thompsonville Grade School 21165 Shawneetown Road Thompsonville
Ewing-Northern CCSD #115 51 North Main Street Ewing
Thompsonville High School 21135 Shawneetown Road Thompsonville
Central Junior High School 1500 East 9th Street West Frankfort
Denning Elementary School 1401 West 6th Street West Frankfort
Frankfort High School 601 East Main Street West Frankfort
AKIN CCSD #91 21962 Akin Blacktop Thompsonville
Franklin Co. Regional Vocational System 202 West Main Street Benton
Franklin-Jefferson Special Ed. Cooperative 409 East Park Street Benton
Frankfort Intermediate School 800 North Cherry West Frankfort
Morthland College 202 E Oak Street West Frankfort
Medical Care Facilities
Facility Name Address City
St. Anthony’s Memorial Hospital 503 North Maple Street Effingham
Franklin Hospital 201 Bailey Lane Benton
The H Group 902 West Main Street West Frankfort
Highlander House 904 East Main Street Benton
Homestead House 905 North Jefferson West Frankfort
Hopes Corner 1600 North Main Street Benton
Midway Group Home 1102 East St. Louis Street West Frankfort
West City Apartment 409 South George Street West City
Fifth Seasons Residential 401 North Du Quoin Street Benton
Frankfort Care Center 2500 East St. Louis Street West Frankfort
Helia Healthcare 1310 Mark Franklin Street Benton
Heritage Woods of Benton 1305 Bailey Lane Benton
Redwood Manor 802 West Franklin Street Sesser
Stonebridge 902 South Mc Leansboro Street Benton
Westside Care Center 601 North Columbia West Frankfort
Miners Memorial Health Center 2553 Ken Gray Boulevard West Frankfort
Heartland Women’s Healthcare 201 Bailey Lane Benton
Heartland Specialty Group 215 North Logan Street West Frankfort
Christopher Rural Health Planning Group 4241 Highway 14 West Christopher
Franklin Rural Health Clinic III 309 West St. Louis Street West Frankfort
Sesser Community Health Center 6294 State Highway 154 Sesser
Franklin County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan September 28, 2016
Appendix F: Critical Facilities Map Page 114
Appendix F . Cr i t ical Faci l i t ies Map See Attached Large Format Map of Critical Facilities.